Fab9Tuning's NC MX-5 Turbo Kit Discussion- EFR/Garrett V-Band - Page 7 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Prefabbed Turbo Kits A place to discuss prefabricated turbo kits on the market
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-31-2016, 02:49 AM   #121
FAB
Fab9Tuning.com
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
FAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 943
Total Cats: 394
Default

Alright guys, it's now 2am here and after multiple 14-16 hour days I've finally produced a "pre-production" spec kit and installed it on our own NC. This kit was produced using the same method, jigs and component list that will be shipped to each customer. Over all I'd estimate the installation will take an end user around 7 hours and a 6-pack or two to complete. This is in a perfect world with the required tools on hand. This time will be quite a bit shorter for a shop with a proper lift and appropriate tools.

The installation was impressively smooth. It's not an easy installation by any means as the NC engine bay is VERY tight - but each component fell into place just as it was designed to without any questionable actions required.

Whats next? We now have measurements for coolant/oil lines and a proper list of needed components. The first kits will be packaged this week and 3 pre-production guys will be invoiced for their remaining balance.

With zero tune we were able to do very little driving but it seemed VERY eager to get into boost...



Attached Images
File Type: jpg 24096243403_55c165fdd0_c.jpg (106.5 KB, 530 views)
File Type: jpg 24723082805_c5d36c74d5_c.jpg (138.1 KB, 524 views)
FAB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2016, 05:19 PM   #122
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 165
Total Cats: 19
Default

Attached Images
File Type: jpg 3ee9f9d396fbab37496db7ac26c0fc68.jpg (12.8 KB, 496 views)
albuquerquefx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2016, 11:50 AM   #123
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 165
Total Cats: 19
Default

I'm gently nudging this thread so Fab9 can post a picture of the optional coating for the charge pipes. He posted it over on M.Net but has probably been too busy to cross-post here. They look fantastic
albuquerquefx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2016, 12:26 PM   #124
FAB
Fab9Tuning.com
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
FAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 943
Total Cats: 394
Default

We need to hire you. Cheers.

Ok guys - Wrinkle black seems to be the most desirable finish. Just wanted to give you guys a quick glance before you see it anywhere else.

Attached Images
File Type: jpg 24677596802_5a10aef29e_c.jpg (90.5 KB, 442 views)
FAB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2016, 06:12 PM   #125
hox
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Portland,OR
Posts: 53
Total Cats: 1
Default

Looks very nice. Would like to see more shots of the bay and underneath to study how these new bits integrate.
hox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 10:45 AM   #126
Newb
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 23
Total Cats: 2
Default

Just ordered my 3 Bar MAP....Not much else to do and I will be 100% ready to get this thing installed.
BlueFireIce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 11:28 AM   #127
FAB
Fab9Tuning.com
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
FAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 943
Total Cats: 394
Default

We just ordered a handful of clutches for inventory. Our NC didn't make it through one pull before the factory clutch let go.

If you're in need of one send me a note, we're discounting supporting mods for our pre-production customers.
FAB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 11:44 AM   #128
Newb
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 23
Total Cats: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAB View Post
We just ordered a handful of clutches for inventory. Our NC didn't make it through one pull before the factory clutch let go.

If you're in need of one send me a note, we're discounting supporting mods for our pre-production customers.
Was this on the dyno?

I have the FM happy meal, hopefully it holds up.
BlueFireIce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 12:14 PM   #129
FAB
Fab9Tuning.com
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
FAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 943
Total Cats: 394
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueFireIce View Post
Was this on the dyno?

I have the FM happy meal, hopefully it holds up.
Unfortunately no, it was on the first pull after flashing it. 1st,2nd,3rd no traction, 4th, 5th clutch slip. Spool is unbelievably quick.

The ACT Clutches we're stocking up on are 430ft lb kits. Not sure what the happy meal is rated for.
FAB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 12:24 PM   #130
Newb
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 23
Total Cats: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAB View Post
Unfortunately no, it was on the first pull after flashing it. 1st,2nd,3rd no traction, 4th, 5th clutch slip. Spool is unbelievably quick.

The ACT Clutches we're stocking up on are 430ft lb kits. Not sure what the happy meal is rated for.
The Happy Meal is very conservatively rated at 260 ft/lb, I know Joe runs them on a few boosted 2.5L without issue. Don't know what the breaking point is, but my end goals are 300-350. Time will tell....
BlueFireIce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2016, 11:57 AM   #131
FAB
Fab9Tuning.com
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
FAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 943
Total Cats: 394
Default

Alright gents, another late evening producing these kits. As many of you know we run the very busy e-commerce side of the business during the day. These kits, with their attention to detail and immediate popularity have truly become a business on their own and we have you early adopters to thank - not for the late hours but for reminding us why we're in this industry. You preproduction guys have been the most important factor of this whole process. That support has pushed us harder to make this kit stand out, use better materials, and refine our fabrication processes.

For us it's not good enough that we're doing the best WE can, we're driven knowing we are creating the best solution, period.

Wrapped up 5 charge pipe kits last night in addition to the 3 that are already produced and shipping Monday. Not sure the other guys have room to rub anything in, these are pre-production customers, not kits. We've sold nearly a dozen of these kits and are on schedule to have 8 of them will be shipped in less than 3 weeks - Didn't take over a year to get a single car on the road



The quality of this manifold is truly unmatched. The prep that goes into each schedule elbow piece really shines through on the final product. Fully chamfered, perfect fitment and back purged welds that will perform as good as they look.






We will try to keep updates frequent but it's crunch time now that each component is finalized.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 24371465153_0707753087_z.jpg (206.2 KB, 323 views)
File Type: jpg 24880366252_c7f57b5abd_z.jpg (182.9 KB, 321 views)
File Type: jpg 24998378885_40c37575bb_z.jpg (94.7 KB, 321 views)
FAB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2016, 12:30 PM   #132
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,085
Total Cats: 30
Default

Gorgeous product. Compared to the competition who literally welded the exhaust side of the turbo to the manifold to keep it on, there really isn't a comparison. Stupid cheap NCs these days+this kit looks like a bargain path to having a ton of fun.
albumleaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 04:48 AM   #133
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: SE NM
Posts: 1,458
Total Cats: 48
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by albumleaf View Post
Gorgeous product. Compared to the competition who literally welded the exhaust side of the turbo to the manifold to keep it on, there really isn't a comparison. Stupid cheap NCs these days+this kit looks like a bargain path to having a ton of fun.
+1

I am pretty close to getting an 06 here pretty soon, as long as it checks out. I will have to put a built 2.5 in it first, though, as the early 06 motors have turned out to be pretty grenade-y, even at stock power, much less with a 6758 on it!
Chilicharger665 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2016, 04:40 PM   #134
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 165
Total Cats: 19
Default

Yeah, the '06 thru '08 had the bizzaro rod bearing issues; they'd go AWOL seemingly at random. Even folks with stock power levels would suddenly find themselves strapped to a low yield shrapnel bomb while putzing down the street in traffic.

I'm not as convinced about the superiority of the 2.5L over the 2.0L, although it truly depends on what you are looking for. I prefer the happier-to-rev 2.0L block, as the 2.5L has the far lower rod-ratio which gives it great low-end grunt but kinda falls flat after 5k. If I explodey my 2L block, I'll probably either go full LS-tarded with it, or else build a bored 2L block with better flowing heads and a set of aftermarket cams.

Also don't forget: the NC transmissions, even the NC2 and later models, all seem to give up when you cross the 350TQ line with any regularity. I'm going to see what I can do (with assistance from my tuner, of course) to keep the torque at or near the 300 mark and just use the extra RPMs to make power. That still gives me headroom for a 400HP monster, hopefully with less worry about shearing teeth or cracking the case.

We shall see.
albuquerquefx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2016, 04:49 PM   #135
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,091
Total Cats: 90
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by albuquerquefx View Post
Yeah, the '06 thru '08 had the bizzaro rod bearing issues; they'd go AWOL seemingly at random. Even folks with stock power levels would suddenly find themselves strapped to a low yield shrapnel bomb while putzing down the street in traffic.

I'm not as convinced about the superiority of the 2.5L over the 2.0L, although it truly depends on what you are looking for. I prefer the happier-to-rev 2.0L block, as the 2.5L has the far lower rod-ratio which gives it great low-end grunt but kinda falls flat after 5k. If I explodey my 2L block, I'll probably either go full LS-tarded with it, or else build a bored 2L block with better flowing heads and a set of aftermarket cams.

Also don't forget: the NC transmissions, even the NC2 and later models, all seem to give up when you cross the 350TQ line with any regularity. I'm going to see what I can do (with assistance from my tuner, of course) to keep the torque at or near the 300 mark and just use the extra RPMs to make power. That still gives me headroom for a 400HP monster, hopefully with less worry about shearing teeth or cracking the case.

We shall see.
The 2.5s are nice that they have enormous rods, a much better flowing head, and they can still safely Rev as high as every other mzr that doesn't have a keyed crank snout
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2016, 05:23 PM   #136
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 165
Total Cats: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafy View Post
The 2.5s are nice that they have enormous rods, a much better flowing head, and they can still safely Rev as high as every other mzr that doesn't have a keyed crank snout
Well... If we're talking "built motors" which is what Chili was alluding to, the stock rod thickness is mostly meaningless. Even if we're not, the stocker 2.0L rods from the NC2 and later can deal with as much power as the stock transmission can take.

I agree with the higher flowing heads, although if we're talking built motors again, you can just swap the 2.5L heads onto the 2.0L block and we're back at square one.

Also, while the 2.5L can rev as high as the other MZR's, the shorter rod ratio means the torque rolloff at high RPM will be significantly worse. Even with cams, even with head work, the rotating assembly geometry isn't right for an efficient high-revver.

Finally, all things equal, the 2.5L swap still ends up mating to the NC transmission, which is fundamentally limited to something moderately below 400TQ. A "built" 2L would end up being cheaper, have a flatter powerband, and would still out-power the capabilities of the transmission when compared to the 2.5L.

Can't argue with more displacement, I get that. Still doesn't seem like a real slam dunk to me
albuquerquefx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2016, 06:37 PM   #137
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,091
Total Cats: 90
Default

Yeah I wasn't talking built motors. The rods on the 2.5 on like they belong in a diesel.
All the mzrs without a key (all stock) on the crank pulley aren't recommended to be run above 7400 rpm based on the testing cosworth did developing race motors and people have run stock 2.5s to 8k already.

The biggest difference is that there's at least 3 2.5s between 300 and 750 at every single junk yard near you, where you're lucky to find an nc2 motor at all and if you do they're around 2k. If you already have an nc1 motor it's probably cheaper to buy the nc2 forged crank and oil pump from mazda and put aftermarket rods in it than buy an nc2 motor.
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2016, 06:42 PM   #138
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hollywood, FL
Posts: 523
Total Cats: 18
Default

Take the .5 liter displacement with a turbo any day. Tune to hold 300wtq. According to some of the reading, 2.5 doesn't need to be built. What's not to like?

And I've never been a fan of stroke/bore ratios being responsible for rpm capabilities. That's the job of cams/headflow/intake manifold flow. At least on any passenger car derived engine.
hector is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2016, 06:44 PM   #139
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 165
Total Cats: 19
Default

I haven't actually seen the rods on the 2.5L; now I'm genuinely curious. The Cosworth 7400RPM thing is a bit of a headscratcher, since the 2L blocks are factory 7500RPM redline and there's a number of them out there doing 8K+ for racing application.

I guess the 2.5L block is cheap because of all the Fords using them? I know the Fusion is a common and plentiful donor.
albuquerquefx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2016, 06:54 PM   #140
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 165
Total Cats: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hector View Post
Take the .5 liter displacement with a turbo any day. Tune to hold 300wtq. According to some of the reading, 2.5 doesn't need to be built. What's not to like?
If the limit is 300TQ (and it should be, if you want the transmission to live a reasonable life) then it's just as easily attained on the 2L block. Sure, more displacement = more better, but since we're power limited by other parts of the drivetrain anyway...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hector View Post
And I've never been a fan of stroke/bore ratios being responsible for rpm capabilities. That's the job of cams/headflow/intake manifold flow. At least on any passenger car derived engine.
It's a physics issue, not a preference. The higher peak piston speeds in a lower rod-ratio engine mean flame-front propagation speed vs timing challenges at high RPM, they also drive higher head flow requirements because of said piston speed changes.

A lower rod-ratio engine means smaller delta between average and peak piston speeds, meaning you can keep slightly smaller valve openings to maintain velocity (versus having to go for outright flow to keep up with the higher piston speed) which helps with atomization and more efficient cylinder evacuation and filling. The lower peak piston speed also means slightly longer duration (given equal RPM) for your ignited air/fuel mixture to exert force on the face of the piston during the power stroke.

Both reasons are why longer rod-ratio engines have a flatter power curve. Any work you do to a shorter rod-ratio engine to "overcome" these two obstacles can be equally applied to the longer rod-ratio engines with the same results.

The only REAL win here is apparently the significant cost difference due to cheap, plentiful supply of good quality junkyard donors. I didn't realize how big the difference was until I did some google thanks to Leafy, but he's right - the 2.5L blocks are cheap.

The extra displacement helps a bit, sure, but you're going to snap a transmission if you really want to use it all. Given how cheap they are and given how the NC1's like to eat rod bearings, I think Chili has it right -- the 2.5L swap is probably the best way to go afterall if he's buying an '06-'08.
albuquerquefx is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Need help - Stock Balancer and Fastforward overlay pulleys Frank_and_Beans Supercharger Discussion 13 09-12-2016 09:17 PM
LucaCarMods's Boosted Dutch Miata Build! LucaCarMods Build Threads 11 02-14-2016 07:13 AM
Koni 1150 Coilover Kit drumman83 Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 2 09-25-2015 08:03 PM
WTB 90-97 miata low profile headlight kit DonPlatt WTB 0 09-25-2015 03:57 AM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:19 AM.