|
01 VVT Head on 94 block???
I know that the 99-00 head works on the earlier 1.8L engine but what about the 01+ VVT head? Also would my MS be able to use one if its outputs to control the VVT?
|
the only ECUs that control the VVT that I know of are the hydra and the freedom. The hydra is $2k and the freedom is in japaneese, so it makes things difficult.
|
In fairness, no one has tried to make the ms run vvt either, to my knowledge. Obviously it doesn't do it out of the box or without custom work like the previously mentioned solutions.
|
As I understand it VVT requires a squarewave to drive the solenoid as its constantly variable not just on or off. One option would be to use the EBC driver and PWM map but it hasn't been done yet and I'm not sure how you could get the MS to monitor the cam angle and contantly adjust in a closed loop (it has to do this as it modulates oil pressure to move the cam and the oil pressure will change as you rev the engine). Maybe a second MS1 running the solenoid from the injector driver so you can have a fully mappable cam advance?
Rev has made a separate controller for his VVT perhaps he can chime in? The other option is to lock the cam in the 0 degrees position or swap in a static cam and remove all the VVT bullshit. Unfortunately you cannot just leave the VVT unplugged as the cam will then go fully retarded and you will make no power :( |
so do you think I should sell the head and try and find the 99-00 head? What about using the cams out of the 94 head I have?
|
94-98 heads had HLAs 99+ inc vvt had solid lifters. I dont think that the cams are interchangable.
|
Originally Posted by neogenesis2004
(Post 279854)
In fairness, no one has tried to make the ms run vvt either, to my knowledge. Obviously it doesn't do it out of the box or without custom work like the previously mentioned solutions.
|
|
Originally Posted by paul
(Post 279903)
|
Originally Posted by TurboTim
(Post 279913)
Ohh...can I have my cake and eat it too?
so yeah, square wave with 100% duty is basically a straight voltage and square wave with 0% duty cycle is no voltage. Switch at 4500 or wherever floats your boat. |
the cake is a lie.
|
Originally Posted by Ben
(Post 279901)
Jerry & I were discussing the possibility of running VVT off the boost control ouptut. Not as advanced as the Hydra, but should be functional. Untested theory.
|
yea but in theory communism works too, and we've seen how that turns out.
|
Originally Posted by y8s
(Post 279968)
there is no cake!
so yeah, square wave with 100% duty is basically a straight voltage and square wave with 0% duty cycle is no voltage. Switch at 4500 or wherever floats your boat. |
Originally Posted by disturbedfan121
(Post 279992)
yea but in theory communism works too, and we've seen how that turns out.
It's just a solenoid...boost control tables work very well based on tps and rpm, could make it well very well. keep them open down low, and cruise for torque, closed for +4.5K and wot. and really, the theory of communism is silly. |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 280002)
and really, the theory of communism is silly.
|
Well, somebody needs to get on this shit and I'm certainly not the one to do it. Can you run 2 boost tables simultaneously on different outputs? ONE actually for the EBC, and THE OTHER for the bastardized VVT?
|
no, but you can run a standalone boost controller. there was a greddy in the classifieds but someone beat me to it.
|
i mean hell, if you just need to activate the solenoid at a certain rpm, the water injection circuit could trigger at rpm...
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 280021)
i mean hell, if you just need to activate the solenoid at a certain rpm, the water injection circuit could trigger at rpm...
|
I'm pretty sure Matt's above plot shows full advance and full retard, with no gain in between at 50%.
http://www.y8spec.com/dyno/vvt_range.jpg |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 280029)
I'm pretty sure Matt's above plot shows full advance and full retard, with no gain in between at 50%.
|
ben, look at the teenie tiny area where the purple line is higher than BOTH the red and blue line (3750-4700). how much power you think that is? 10 hp/ft-lb? 5%? on top of a 35 ft-lb gain already? I say do it the cheap and easy way.
another thing: you may not be able to go to "half way" or some other value than full advance or full retard without constant feedback from the CAS. |
oh um i have no idea what switching it over from -12.5 to +6 (or +12.5 if that's what it is) would do for driveability. probably not noticable if done at the crossover point.
|
Can I have your engine Matt?
|
Originally Posted by y8s
(Post 2800)
I say do it the cheap and easy way.
|
that's how i'd try it. and if not the ebc circuit, a simple ground circuit like the NOS or WI. to trigger ground at a certain rpm. but the EBc could do a better job controlling DC% for a smooth transition.
|
Originally Posted by MikeRiv87
(Post 280101)
So just to clarify said "cheap and easy" way would be to remap my EBC table for 0% from 0-4499 rpm and 100% from 4500-redline. Then run power to one end of the vvt solenoid and ground from vvt to the ms?
But... yeah. Tim: I plan to keep it as a "spare" when I get the new one built. sry! |
If I'm reading what you and others have wrote in this thread correctly and seeing as I will be setting this up using a 1.6 harness anything running to the VVT will have to be custom. Based on that statement I can assume that leaving it unhooked will give me full retard which gives nice torque up till about 4500, at which I would want to send voltage to the vvt solenoid sending the cam full advance giving me a nice boost in hp. So it looks like I will try and use a water injection output which is a simple switch ground/power circuit. I'm assuming that at any amount of throttle I still want the cam crossover. Seems simple and way better than the exintake cam mod I was going to try and monkey with.
|
Before anyone gets all carried away with illusions of grandeur(as MikeRiv has started to do on our local Miata forum) I would just like to make some observations. Correct me if I'm wrong.
We are talking about the performance of a VVT head with the VVT operational vs. it being disabled. Not a VVT head vs a non VVT 99/00 head. It only makes sense that an engine with a cam designed for VVT would perform a hell of a lot different with the VVT on/off. So unless it's the same profile cam that is found in the 99/00 we can call it a shitty all around cam when not used with VVT. So whats the deal with the VVT intake cam vs. the 99/00 cam? Ben? Does anyone have any dyno charts of the same turbo kit on a 99/00 vs 01+ that shows the VVT setup to be superior by any margin that cannot be attributed to the higher compression ratio? Mazdaspeed chose to go without the VVT head for the MSM. I was under the impression that it was because they could not make considerable gains on a turbo'd car to justify it. Anyone know more about this? |
they could have done without VVT on the mazdaspeed to cut cost too.
|
I found a very crude way of operating the VVT. Here is a pic from a page in the service manual. Basically if i under stand it correctly no power for full retard and nice torque then add 12v for full advance and top end Vtekz.
http://i26.tinypic.com/2hqe3wy.jpg |
I have been reading over at M.net not saying they are gods of the miata creed but many can be quoted saying that you may not see much gain NA but with a turbo the way the VVT works you can note awesome gains. Has something to do with what was touched on in my exintake cam thread. Again the exintake on an NA gives some gain but it makes an ideal scenario for a turbo with the overlap.
|
Originally Posted by Stealth97
(Post 280298)
they could have done without VVT on the mazdaspeed to cut cost too.
|
Originally Posted by MikeRiv87
(Post 280301)
I have been reading over at M.net not saying they are gods of the miata creed but many can be quoted saying that you may not see much gain NA but with a turbo the way the VVT works you can note awesome gains. Has something to do with what was touched on in my exintake cam thread. Again the exintake on an NA gives some gain but it makes an ideal scenario for a turbo with the overlap.
|
Originally Posted by paul
(Post 280304)
True, they did do a good job of keeping the price down compared to the non MSM version.
As stated on our "local forum". I want to try something different. Not many people have done a 94-97 block, 01+ Head with semi-working VVT, and a Greddy kit using the ETD 1.8L Greddy Manifold. Im excited to see the results are as apposed to going with a begi/FM kit and knowing exactly what the outcome will be. Main reason why I abandoned 240's almost everything had been done over a dozen times. |
Originally Posted by MikeRiv87
(Post 280307)
LOL
As stated on our "local forum". I want to try something different. Not many people have done a 94-97 block, 01+ Head with semi-working VVT, and a Greddy kit using the ETD 1.8L Greddy Manifold. Im excited to see the results are as apposed to going with a begi/FM kit and knowing exactly what the outcome will be. Main reason why I abandoned 240's almost everything had been done over a dozen times. I'm referring specifically to the claims of 270-300 rwhp you projected. ps, you quoted the wrong post. |
Originally Posted by paul
(Post 280305)
Yeah, are you talking about y8s's threads? again that is about a VVT head using and not using the VVT. or link to said threads
*Also this ideal for turbo that others are referring to I'm assuming has something to do with faster spool and not blowing unused shit out the exhaust before the valves close.
Originally Posted by paul
(Post 280309)
ps, you quoted the wrong post.
|
Originally Posted by MikeRiv87
(Post 280311)
If i had any idea what was a good cam profile was ideal for a turbo vs. NA application maybe we could dissect the 99-00 head in stock form VS the 01+ Head with VVT at full advance above 4500 rpm. The way I'm comprehending this whole thing is that the 99-00 head with stock cam setup is good for NA and good for turbo. (As you have proven with your 300whp.) Now back to exintake thread. The 94-97 stock good NA and turbo. 94-97 exintake modded good NA and ideal for turbo. 01+ VVT head Good NA and ideal for turbo. Now the question is then, Is the 01+ VVT Head's "Ideal for turbo" better performing then the 99-00 Head with stock cam setup? If nobody can answer that then we are pissing in the wind about what makes more power and can get back to figuring out how to make it work in my 1.6L chassis.
*Also this ideal for turbo that others are referring to I'm assuming has something to do with faster spool and not blowing unused shit out the exhaust before the valves close. No i didn't. I was Laughing at your sarcasm to that guy about the MSM... 2. i was serious in saying Mazda did a good job on the price of the MSM. |
Originally Posted by paul
(Post 280312)
1. VVT controls the intake cam only.
Originally Posted by paul
(Post 280312)
2. i was serious in saying Mazda did a good job on the price of the MSM.
Oh I also have a question. All this talk of cam timing has me wondering, how does that affect my ignition timing? Can i just run the semi tuned timing map that many of the locals are using or is the cam timing going to run the risk of detonation? |
Fyi...
unplugged default of the cam is RETARDED which helps power above 4700... (big text = important.) Paul, there's not a lot of data on the 01 intake cam. If you tell me how to measure it, I will. I have a spare 01 head, a dial indicator, and a protractor. |
Ohhhhhhh so i want to, in basic terms, run 12v to solenoid and full advance below 4700 and above 4700 take out the 12v and run full retard.
|
Originally Posted by y8s
(Post 280332)
Paul, there's not a lot of data on the 01 intake cam. If you tell me how to measure it, I will. I have a spare 01 head, a dial indicator, and a protractor.
|
Wow i just found the thread by Y8's that i guess paul was referring to before. Has all the info that i need to get this working. Now im just wondering if I should use the ebc map and have the tps settings included in the vvt control or if i should go with just a WI output and have just an on/off rpm and then have to run a manual boost control or buy a standalone ebc.
http://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread.php?t=276072 |
I'm a tool who should think before posting.
|
Originally Posted by MikeRiv87
(Post 280311)
...94-97 exintake modded...ideal for turbo...
|
Originally Posted by MikeRiv87
(Post 280366)
Wow i just found the thread by Y8's that i guess paul was referring to before. Has all the info that i need to get this working. Now im just wondering if I should use the ebc map and have the tps settings included in the vvt control or if i should go with just a WI output and have just an on/off rpm and then have to run a manual boost control or buy a standalone ebc.
http://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread.php?t=276072 really, you only see changes over RPM. not boost, not tps, not the size of your shoe. just RPM. Here's a good example. The GREEN line. I advanced til the car made 3 psi and then went full retard. Look at the power drop like a rock. The other lines are the same as the original graph posted earlier. Leaving it advanced until the cross-over RPM point makes more power regardless of boost. http://y8spec.com/dyno/vvt_boost.jpg |
I would go with the ebc option because you can choose a couple of cells and make the rpm value change by 50rpm per cell and then scale the duty resulting in an nice smooth tranistion over 200 rpm or so. I expect the on/off option would work but it just seems so crude, like you flick a switch and the camshaft goes clunk. Probably just me being ----.
Edit. Ok I'm game for this, anyone have a VVT head to sell me? Pref with an intake manifold (am I right in thinking that the 94 intake manifold will not bolt up to the 01+ head beacuse of the runner angles?) |
Originally Posted by TurboTim
(Post 280441)
Why?
|
Isky cams does it for about $25. That's where I sent the BP5A MSM intake cam. The peak numbers for the VVT intake are on Randy's site already.
|
My curiosity isn't worth 25 bucks. and mostly I want to know the duration compared to the other stockers. If only to answer the question of "nobody's proven the cam is better than the 99".
maybe if someone had a 2876R on a 99 motor at 10 psi I could answer better. |
Originally Posted by y8s
(Post 280456)
Tim do you know how to measure a cam?
Originally Posted by Duckie_uk
(Post 280455)
Edit. Ok I'm game for this, anyone have a VVT head to sell me? Pref with an intake manifold (am I right in thinking that the 94 intake manifold will not bolt up to the 01+ head beacuse of the runner angles?)
|
Originally Posted by y8s
(Post 280518)
My curiosity isn't worth 25 bucks. and mostly I want to know the duration compared to the other stockers. If only to answer the question of "nobody's proven the cam is better than the 99".
.370 VVT .326 99 IN .349 99-00 JDM/MSM IN "BP5A" .349 99-00 EX for "exhintake" conversion The VVT is the shortest duration (slightly) of all these but being able to control IVC sorta makes up for that as you have found. |
i saw 010 duration on randy's site, but it didn't have a lift value.
duration at 010: 94-97: 218 99-00: 257 01-05: 241 exhaust cams look to be the same. in any case, turbo cars like modest duration and high lift. there might be off-boost or low rpm gains from using the 99 profile but it hardly seems worth the effort or cost to do that over a custom cam grind. emilio: in your esteemed opinion would the 99 cam as-is have a wider or taller power band than the 01 VVT cam fully optimized? assume same compression and turbo running, say, 15 psi. |
new post for different info.
checking the hydra wiring diagram and 01 service manual led me to to this: 2001 ECU Pin 4D is constant +12V 2001 ECU Pin 4R is PWM to gnd. I guess floating or 12V means "full retard". The top wire in the connector (yellow) is the +12V supply. so yeah, supply one wire (TBD) with +12V and the other (TBD) with a switched ground that pulls to ground at whatever magic RPM you want. two dyno pulls will tell you. |
One more question that seems pertinant. Where does the oil feed for the cam actuator come from? Up through the head in a gallery or from an external line?
|
Originally Posted by y8s
(Post 280575)
i saw 010 duration on randy's site, but it didn't have a lift value.
duration at 010: 94-97: 218 99-00: 257 01-05: 241 exhaust cams look to be the same. in any case, turbo cars like modest duration and high lift. there might be off-boost or low rpm gains from using the 99 profile but it hardly seems worth the effort or cost to do that over a custom cam grind. emilio: in your esteemed opinion would the 99 cam as-is have a wider or taller power band than the 01 VVT cam fully optimized? assume same compression and turbo running, say, 15 psi. I strongly believe that there is no combination of OE cams and a BP4W head will make more power than an optimized BP6D head. You know, Maruha offers stage 1-3 VVT cams right? Something like that take a lot of time and money to develop. They know VVT is where the power is at on the BP series motors. |
01+ VVT heads may see a price increase if more people start toying with them and perfecting activation and such. I for one am very excited to see what my new setup will be able to do.
*Important question: Does the 94-97 block have all the proper oil ports to supply the VVT head with oil including the vvt solenoid? |
Originally Posted by MikeRiv87
(Post 280700)
01+ VVT heads may see a price increase if more people start toying with them and perfecting activation and such. I for one am very excited to see what my new setup will be able to do.
*Important question: Does the 94-97 block have all the proper oil ports to supply the VVT head with oil including the vvt solenoid? |
Ok so what your saying is that if i bolt an 01+ VVT head on an early 1.8L block it will work just wont send oil to the VVT, seeing as there is an external oil supply going to the VVT solenoid? So now we have our next problem which can be solved easily. I believe the 1.8L i have lined up is an early one with the oil supply tap on the exhaust side of the block. If so then i'll run that to my turbo and then run a "T" off my oil pressure sensor like the later 1.8L have to and send that oil via an SS line to the VVT solenoid. Does this sound like it could work? Without a service manual for the 94 and 01 im just speculating.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:22 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands