wadda think?
07-19-2007, 02:51 PM
#41
I love their logic behind it all. "The miata motor was designed in the 80s!" What the hell kind of argument are you making? **** the DSM motor (4g63) was made in the 80s too and still is a beast. Someone please plot their ******* dyno of a 1.6 or 1.8 w/ a turbo against his POS and post it there. I will love to watch them flame it somehow.
Reply
0
0
07-19-2007, 02:54 PM
#42
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 457
Total Cats: 0
he spent all that cash on a swap and then put ******* Prosport gauges? Those things are for the broke *** fool who wants Defi looks but Napa Gauge Performance... what the hell?!
Last edited by LunaticDriver; 07-19-2007 at 03:09 PM.
Reply
0
0
07-19-2007, 02:59 PM
#43
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 457
Total Cats: 0
I love their logic behind it all. "The miata motor was designed in the 80s!" What the hell kind of argument are you making? **** the DSM motor (4g63) was made in the 80s too and still is a beast. Someone please plot their ******* dyno of a 1.6 or 1.8 w/ a turbo against his POS and post it there. I will love to watch them flame it somehow.
Reply
0
0
07-19-2007, 04:55 PM
#45
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (33)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: atlanta-ish
Posts: 12,659
Total Cats: 134
Reply
0
0
07-19-2007, 05:28 PM
#46
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
put the data into excel.
then you can just do a "finite element" integral.
RPM1-RPM0 * (TQ0+TQ1)/2 = AREA1
then drag that equation down the list so it gives you an area for each segment and sum em up. or much easier: add all the tq values, divide by the number of datapoints, then multiply by the RPM spread.
then you can just do a "finite element" integral.
RPM1-RPM0 * (TQ0+TQ1)/2 = AREA1
then drag that equation down the list so it gives you an area for each segment and sum em up. or much easier: add all the tq values, divide by the number of datapoints, then multiply by the RPM spread.
Reply
0
0
and they suck at it. wtf
07-20-2007, 01:25 AM
#48
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Central California
Posts: 2,544
Total Cats: 4
Hey i think it is pretty cool. May not be the most powerful miata ever made, but it is something sorta different and should be quick enough to be fun. OTOH, it really isnt a motor made to be turboed seeing that it is an aluminum block and has cams from the factory that are made for very high end HP (which apparantly upgraded to even more strung out cams). Seems to me that an SR20, FE3, 4g63, and maybe a few other motors would be better suited to a future turbo upgrade, but the motor in it now is probably one of the best for a low displacement NA setup. Anyways, I wont rag on it because i think it is pretty baddass.
Reply
0
0
07-20-2007, 02:01 AM
#49
Agree, Akaryrye. I guess I have an appreciation for it since I had a few Hondas, one of which revved to 8500 and pulled HARD (above 5500 anyway :gay: )
IMHO, a Miata engine with cams, itbs, etc. still FAILS when compared to the F20C because the Miata engine with all that trash attached is maxxed out. The F20C uses 9k redline and 240bhp as a starting point, and can easily go higher from there.
IMHO, a Miata engine with cams, itbs, etc. still FAILS when compared to the F20C because the Miata engine with all that trash attached is maxxed out. The F20C uses 9k redline and 240bhp as a starting point, and can easily go higher from there.
Reply
0
0
07-20-2007, 09:01 AM
#51
He stated in there somewhere that he wanted an NA solution. The guy loves the engine and that's the only reason he needs. The difference comes in the opinion as to how each would approach their own track Miata. If you don't have an affection for a high revving, high hp to torque disparity - then it will be hard to understand. I wouldn't do it. For the work, I'd definitely have the SBC for the 400hp/400ftlbs. And when gets boring you can upgrade that. 
Reply
0
0
