Ballpark Prediction - NB1 motor + bolt ons/ecu
 

Hey everyone,

Im in the process of replacing the blown motor in my 97 with the following:

-99-00 NB motor, 47k miles, 180 psi dry across all four cylinders
-EUDM squaretop intake manifold
-MSM BP5A camshaft
-Monsterflow Intake with heatshield and thermal wrap
-Racing Beat or Maxim works header, wrapped
-RS*R Exmag GTII catback exhaust
-949racing 1.6 clutch
-XTD Prolite 9.5lb 1.6 flywheel
-MSPNP v1.1

Assuming baseline 99-00 dyno to be roughly 116whp and 94-97 to be 104whp, whats the rough whp estimate you guys think this setup could hit with a dyno tune?

I was also thinking of deleting the MAF and going with the IAT sensor instead, are there some power gains to be had from doing so?

Also any recommendations/tweaks to the setup are welcomed.

140

Doing a quick search I found this:

http://forum.miata.net/vb/showpost.p...1&postcount=24

In which emilio stated a stock NB2 motor with bolt ons and a tune would net 150whp, which is actually a number I was hoping to get closer to.

That said, I dont have the VVT of the NB2 motor, would that be enough difference to make 10whp? Isnt it that the NB1 motor actually makes more power out of the box than the NB2 due to its higher flowing head? I was hoping that in combination a higher flowing intake manifold, quality intake/filter, and the bp5a cam would create a pretty drastic improvement. Especially with a tune.

In any case, my goals are to essentially get the maximum net whp possible without engine work, essentially through bolt ons and a tune. If theres anything else im missing from my list that fits in that category, id love to hear it. Otherwise, do I pretty much have everything covered in the bolt on department? Is this a setup that could benefit from running 93 octane vs 87 pump gas?

When you remove the VICS and VTCS (i.e. the intake) there isn't much difference regarding flow (the NB2 seems to have slightly improved casting behind the intake valve).
The higher compression is one thing you are missing...

I would shave the head to bump compression and use adjustable cam gears. Both of those are cheap they just take time.

Thanks for the replies guys. Kind of wishing I went with a VVT motor now but for the price I got my 99 motor, trans, and 4:3 torsen for, I cant really complain.

I guess the biggest thing thats been on my mind is whether there be a pretty big and noticeable improvement in power and handling between my old and new setup. I dont know what a ~35whp increase would feel like at the track, but am just hoping itll be worth it in the end.

Old setup:
-100k mile 97' motor, possible leak somewhere since there was oil on the threads of cylinder 1 spark plug
-Zero power mods - Stock header, intake, clutch/flywheel, ECU
-PS/AC
-4:1 torsen
-STANCE coilovers (9k/6k)
-949 race alignment
-Racing beat hollow front bar, stock rear bar
-15x8 with 205/50/15 Star Spec Z1
-Hawk DTC 60/30



New setup:
-99-00 NB motor, 47k miles, 180 psi dry across all four cylinders
-EUDM squaretop intake manifold
-MSM BP5A camshaft
-Monsterflow Intake with heatshield and thermal wrap
-Racing Beat or Maxim works header, wrapped
-RS*R Exmag GTII catback exhaust
-949racing 1.6 clutch
-XTD Prolite 9.5lb 1.6 flywheel
-MSPNP v1.1
-4:3 torsen
-Depowered steering rack, debating on keeping AC
-XIDA-S 700/400
-949 race alignment
-RB hollow front bar
-MSM rear bar
-15x9 on 225/45/15 BFG Rivals
-Hawk DTC 60/30

Yes, there will be a big difference. But you gotta be realistic, you're asking us for a complete and utter prediction, then focusing on it being 10hp from where you want it.

lol

It might make 150....or 160....or maybe 130....only way to find out is actually do it. But one thing for sure: I believe it will feel a whole lot better than your '97 setup, and a much much better track car.

LOL I know I know, im just being needy and wanting reassurance ;-).

As a student, its a good amount of money spent, but figured I get it all done while the motor is out anyways. Ive read that running 93 octane isnt necessarily needed or even beneficial if the setup doesnt call for it (ie compression).

Do you think my setup is one that can benefit from the higher 93 octane vs 87? Id like to run e85 but from what ive been reading thats at least another 800-900 to do it properly.

I'd probably run it at the track for extra det protection and whatnot, but on the street I doubt it would matter much.

Got it. So as far as the tune goes, should I put in 93 that day or 87? Or is that negligible?

you tune on the lowest octane, then run higher for protection

or you can just have 2 maps

I'll be watching this thread for results... I've got a very similar build plan for when my '97 motor dies...


One question- why go with the 1.6 clutch? is it that much lighter than the 1.8?

Likely the numbers suggested by Emilio are on CA91 gas. So you would sacrifice some power by tuning on regular fuel.

104whp on a 94-97 is a super healthy car. Most dyno under 100.

There is no thinking about removing the MAF and going with an IAT. There are a few ponies to pick up by removing it, I am not sure how many exactly on a 97. I know on the 1.6 motors it was something like 7-10hp at the wheels with removing the stock AFM and going with the standalone.

Run E85. It will make more power because its an oxygenated fuel.

Yes, from what ive read, the AFMs are very restrictive. Hopefully the MAF delete can net around 2-3whp. Any recommendations on IAT placement along the intake? If it means anything, the monsterflow intake I have is for an NB, which includes a port for the stock MAP sensor that the 94-97 doesnt have as far as I know. Im wondering if I can put it in there.

Hard part is, the crossover tube isnt metal so im not sure how to go about drilling and welding a bung for it.

Id love to, but the costs involved in properly converting the car are around $800-900 additional, which isnt really something im looking to spend at the moment.

Vics motor nets more top end power.

It makes more power because it allows more timing and because it has a higher ratio of hydrogen to carbon than gasoline does. The oxygen in E85 is already bonded to a C and an H, it's already "burned" and is just along for the ride.

--Ian

That would lower the value of the squaretops for N/A use, "JDM YO" factor you mean? Haven't there been dyno plots showing the squaretop as top dog up high (quite some time ago)?

There is no problem with using the stock AIT in any tube available (at zero boost of course). Just drill hole and use the grommet from the stock airbox.
Disregard the fact that my example was a quick hack to be able to race, it's not a tuned length at all, especially not for stock cams.

When I ran NA with my MS back in 2007 I simply drilled a slightly smaller hole then the sensor in the stock tube. I threaded the sensor in as best I could. It worked fine for the 6 months I ran it.

He has a 97 which has the AIT built into the MAF. He is going to use the GM AIT. Otherwise that is a perfectly fine way to do it on a NB.

False. Even though the oxygen in Ethanol is already bonded, its still used in the burn.

Ethanol burn formula:
C2H6O + 3O2 -> 2CO2 + 3H2O

Gasoline burn formula:
2C8H18 + 25O2 -> 16CO2 + 18H2O

Notice how the end product is the same - CO2 and H2O and Gasoline doesn't have any oxygen molecules.

Place the iat anywhere that will put it in direct airflow of the intake charge. Doesn't matter where on the tube, though if its directly behind the radiators it might have a wee bit of heatsoak if you sit in traffic or idling too long.

I've done what Lars did and drilled the tube and just threaded it in before, didn't have issues. Since your intake has a port in it that should work if it fits. Wost case you can just stick it in the filter lol

Pretty sure he's talking about motor and not mani

Sure, but it's a net zero as far as energy is concerned. Chemical reactions release energy by breaking certain types of bonds and making other types of bonds. Oxygen is fairly high on the electronegativity scale, and there's lots of energy to be had by breaking O-O bonds and using those electrons to make C-O or O-H bonds. The O in ethanol doesn't add energy to the reaction any more than doing CO2 injection into the intake manifold would.

(Yes, H2O injection adds power, but it's not by giving you more oxygen to burn, it's by increasing effective octane and reducing the intake charge temperature)

--Ian

Maximum of 130 rwhp on a Dynojet

What do I win if I come the closest? :x:

+1. BP4Ws make slightly more peak power at high RPM because they have more intake cam curtain area. VVT cams are very pointy.

I swapped out the stock engine out of my 97 for a 2003 NB2 engine last winter. With the NB2 engine, I added a RB header, full exhaust from Enthuza, gutted VTCS intake manifold, MS3X, and modified AEM intake. I also swapped in a 6spd transmission with lightweight flywheel and clutch kit from FM.

I am still working on the tune, but the overall results have been great so far. A 40whp jump when you start with 100whp transforms the car. It was definitely a worthwhile effort. The 97 is now a blast to drive with the new engine and supporting bolt on mods.


FYI... I placed the IAT sensor in the end of the air filter:

Grind down the rubber a bit to reduce the thickness
Drill a hole matching the OD of the threads on the IAT sensor
Cut a brass fitting down to make a NTP threaded nut
Insert IAT through end of the filter and use NTP nut to secure from the inside (don't line the nut being inside the intake tract, but with pipe threads I don't see it coming loose)

(The IAT approach only works if you have an open element air filter, but thought this might be useful information for someone.)

Good to know! Can't wait to get this thing in there. With the shape of the monsterflow intake filter, I'm not sure I'd be able to tap it in at the end, I may just tap into one of the openings along the crossover pipe.

With most of the parts added on to increase top end power (4-1 header, MSM cam, squaretop, intake), would there be any benefit to raise the stock redline to around 7500-8000? Would it even be safe at those rpms with the stock 99 motor?

What about a billet oil pump? Necessary for this application?

Stock head ? If the answer is yet, NO don't do it, 7400 RPM is enough and too much maybe.

Get valve springs at least, supertech are cheap and a good protection for overrev. Cheap insurance

to rev past 7k consistently on the bp on track you're gonna need to start upgrading quite a bit of parts that will vibrate apart and/or break

Hey everyone, just got tuned yesterday and wanted to give a quick update. The car was tuned on a Dynojet by a very highly regarded tuner in our area. He really tried to squeeze very last bit of power out of the setup, and we ended up with 130whp/115wtq:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1398891542

The final modlist is as follows:
-99-00 NB motor, 47k miles, 180 psi dry across all four cylinders
-EUDM squaretop intake manifold
-MSM BP5A camshaft
-K&N 69-6000TP Intake
-Racing Beat header, wrapped
-RS*R Exmag GTII catback exhaust
-Exedy Stage 1 - 1.6 clutch
-XTD Prolite 9.5lb 1.6 flywheel
-MSPNP v1.1
-MAF delete, IAT sensor
-Hondata Intake Manifold Gasket
-93 octane

I'm very happy and instantly felt the difference in power. Car revs smooth and extremely quickly when paired with the 4:3 ring gear. With that said, there's something inside me that still wishes I was able to hit 140whp, especially since at this point, there's not much else I can do to net extra hp gains without taking apart the motor. For reference, he showed me some charts of spec miatas he's tuned and they were around 112-116whp on his dyno. Just curious if anyone might have an idea of what it could be missing, or is a dynojet just a low reading dyno? With such small power, 10whp is a pretty big difference.

ALSO - One issue we were having: is it normal for the idle on a 1st gen MSPNP to fluctuate a bit?

-With the lights off, the car idles around 1000-1200.
-When the lights turn on, the idle drops and begins to fluctuate from 700-1200, almost like the extra current draw brought the revs down to 700 and the engine is trying to compensate my quickly bringing it to 1200 before it drops again. At some points, the engine straight stalls.

He said its a minor issue that can easily be sorted out once I find a solution, and to possibly look into whether the MSPNP utilized an engine load control unit? He said it seems like it has to do with something like the MSPNP isn't signaling for the alternator to run harder to compensate for the increased load from turning on the headlights. Either way, even when setting base timing, we couldn't get the idle to remain completely steady at 850rpm, despite messing with the IAC screw and throttle cable.

Apologies for the long post. Thanks guys!

Lol crazy, you hit it right on the dot. Even the type of dyno! That's gotta deserve something.

I'm guessing E85 isn't available? That might net you your 10 horses.

E85 is available, but is not an option considering the car isn't properly setup for it. The values I was shooting for were based off Emilio's 95R' build, considering my bolt-on modlist is essentially identical:

https://www.miataturbo.net/general-m...project-63125/

Granted, he did have 10:5:1 pistons and a VVT NB2 motor, which likely attributed to his 145whp, but was only on 91 octane.

0086 for the win. :brain:

An extra full point of compression and VVT sound like ~15whp to me. 130 at the wheels N/A is very respectable.

Are you using hi-res firmware on your ms1? It also sounds like you should just run a little higher idle, i usually aim for 950rpm hot, it's less likely to overload and fluctuate when you use your lights, etc.

Also, GREAT numbers imho. Congrats. Now tell us, how does it feel?

Either the dyno reads very low or there is something else going on with the motor. I made 138 whp with a very similar set up on 91 octane without a square top and using a Jackson Racing header. If you swapped the newer motor into an older chassis you need to run the 94-97 alternator, I do not know those details of your set up though. Your power curve does not look like most of the square top manifold dyno's I've seen, you have a sharp drop off in the upper RPM. I run a VICS manifold and don't see a drop off that severe, here is an old chart from my motor for example;
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1398907252

A point and a half -- Emilio's car was 11.0:1, a stock NB1 motor is 9.5:1 (NB2 is 10.0:1).

There's probably also some power available in the Adaptronic vs the MS1. If it's a stock 4-tooth trigger wheel then the timing isn't going to be as precise as the 12-1 wheel that Emilio's thread says he used.

--Ian

For more power; compression yes, adaptronic vs megasquirt no.

All you need is injectors and a tune. Nothing fancy.

Thank you! Car feels great apart from the idle issue. Very different animal than I'm used to. In regards to the firmware, how do I check for that? Also, is the idle rpm something I can do on my own without a wideband or bringing it back to the tuner?

That's closer to what I was expecting.. odd. I wonder what gives? I'm using the alternator from my 97. All sensors were transferred from my 97 onto the 99 motor, and is running off the 97 harness to the MSPNP. That reminds me, in the middle of the tune, I noticed two things in the engine bay - the IAT sensor fell out of the bung and the bung covering one of the holes in the intake also came off. My tuner assured me it didn't mess with anything, but now I'm curious if it may have affecting something drastically? I eventually ziptied the IAT to the intake so it wouldn't fall off, but the hole in the intake was left uncovered. He said as long as it's not the intake manifold it should be fine. I'm assuming he's saying its okay because I deleted the MAF sensor? You can see the hole here by the coupler that connects the intake pipe to the throttle body, and you can also see that the IAT sensor actually fell out of the bung when the picture was taken since it can't be seen in the middle of the intake pipe:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1398925808


AFAIK, the pistons were 11:0:1 but they shaved them down to make 10:5:1. Either way, its more compression than both the NB1 and NB2 motors.

Oh, I thought I recalled reading somewhere about Savington mentioning the need for different lines/fuel pump/etc..to do it "properly". I honestly haven't done enough research to determine what that entails or if it's overkill for a car that only sees the track 5 months out of the year.

The megasquirt runs speed/density, which doesn't rely on all of the intake air passing through a sensor in order to fuel it properly. A hole in the intake pipe ahead of the throttle body just means you're getting unfiltered air (well, it could in theory also change the resonance of the intake, but I doubt that's a significant factor here).

Doing E85 pretty much requires new injectors, because you'll need something like 60% more fuel than you would with gasoline and it's very unlikely you have that much headroom in the injectors you already have. The stock fuel pump, OTOH, has a lot more headroom than the stock injectors, so there might be enough for E85 on a naturally aspirated engine. For a high power turbo E85 build you need bigger fuel hard lines, but for an NA engine that's overkill.

Doing it "properly" means swapping out all of the fuel related components for ones that are actually rated for E85, adding a flex fuel sensor and an ECU that can read it, etc. That's a lot more work than is strictly required.

The big downside to E85 from what I can see is that it's not available at the race track (at least, not at any of the tracks around here). That means I'd need to take it there with me, and for a 2-day track weekend I'd probably need a 55 gallon drum of it, which gets into things like DOT hazmat transportation regulations and other icky stuff.

As for the ECU, timing precision is pretty important. If the spark timing is off by a degree or two, then you wind up needing to back the timing off by that degree or two as a safety margin. The NB's 4-tooth crank angle sensor is a lot more precise than the NA's cam angle sensor (no stretchy belt in between), but a 12-tooth wheel is even better. More teeth lets the ECU measure the engine speed over a short period of time, giving it a more accurate view of the rate at which the RPM is rising. How much power does that translate into on an NA build? I have no idea.

--Ian

60% more fuel for a car like this is a bit much , reality is around 10-15% more fuel in cruising and ~30% more at WOT. Stock injectors do not flow enough, you might be able to get there with 60psi of fuel pressure but your injectors might be maxed. It's just as cheap to get some RX-8 injectors from Rockauto for $35ea.

From what I've seen from people using it in N/A Miatas it's around 5 gallons of E85 for one session. If you're towing it's not problem to fill the tank and throw some 5 gal jugs in the bed of the truck.

This is true but I don't think it translates into much of a loss, if any, at these power levels. From what I've seen on my car it hasn't held me back yet. However, the more exotic the engine becomes I would see this as a way of keeping your motor safe if you run the tune on the edge.

If you don't know, you are probably on the standard firmware. You NEED hi-res code on a ms1 to be able to idle smoothly, it is a huge difference. I'm not 100% sure off the top of my head how to check the firmware, just do some googling and it's all pretty easy. Actually, i know one easy way. When you pull up your injector pulsewidths in MS, do you see something like "2.1" or "2.15"? If you just see x.x it's on the standard firmware, if you see x.xx you are on hi-res. The hi-res code increases your injector resolution for more fine tuning, which results in less fluctuation and "hunting" for idle.

There is a thread somewhere on here that i followed to flash my ms1 with hi-res, and it made all the difference in the world with my idle quality.

You can adjust your idle RPM and other settings via MS as well, so try raising the idle and switching to hi-res code and you will be set.

Hey thanks for the great info man! Did simply flashing the firmware do the trick? Or did you still have to adjust the settings yourself once the increased resolution was made available? If it's the latter, I don't know the first thing on how to do that.

You just need to flash the firmware and your tune should still be 90% of the way there. You of course will want to fine tune it again after getting the higher res firmware so that you can take full advantage of it.

In my case i had not a clue how to flash firmware, but there is a thread somewhere here on it and I just followed that. It was actually pretty easy, despite being a somewhat daunting task on paper.

Re-tuning is SUPER easy, just look at your AFR at idle and you can adjust your VE to get the afr at idle perfect. Once you have your idle dialed in, you can use TunerStudio's VEAL (ve analyze live) feature to auto tune in your fuel map, just make sure you have good target afrs and your wbo2 is accurate.

I'm not saying this will 100% fix your problems, but it definitely fixed my "hunting" idle i'd have from time to time.