When is Jackong Racing going to release thier CARB Rotrex kit?
 

Anyone have any idea when JR will release the kit for miata?

Tomorrow I heard.

Jackson Racing, both the original and its many namesake-derivatives, have earned a well-deserved reputation over the years for promising vastly more than they have the capacity to deliver.

I called them, they said as soon as noobs stop making silly thread.

....so never

I bet you Jackson Racing has an idea

do they have a raging clue?

I have a raging something.

one of my favorite episodes.

I've heard that they've had Carb approval for roughly a year, so the question is, if that's true, why can't they assemble the kits and get them to market.

Maybe because they have other better things to do? Jesus. You act like you deserve the kit from them

Somebody took their smartass pills this morning

Huh. Sure enough, EO D-700-4 is listed on the ARB website: http://arb.ca.gov/msprog/aftermkt/de...eo/D-700-4.pdf

If you read page 2 of the EO, it does note that approval was granted based on previously-submitted test data from prior EOs on other cars (eg: EO D-700, 700-1, etc), so the fact that they have this EO doesn't necessarily mean that they've built a single one for a Miata, even as a prototype.

Doesn't mean they haven't, either...

That's right.

see: https://jacksonracing.com/jackson-ra...y-laguna-seca/

Four of the five Miatas are listed with the CARB-certified system, and they were giving rides at the MRLS Miata 25th Anniversary event last year. At MRLS, I asked them how they thought their system would compare to the (then unreleased) TDR Rotrex system, other than being CARB-certified, and they said then they had never heard of it. :dunno:

Bill

TDR and JR both should be better systems than the Kraftwrecks kit. TDR has been slow at getting theirs to market but they are a small couple guy operation so that's to be expected. I wonder if the JR is a supply chain issue?

I keep wondering why there's been so much apparent interest in rotary superchargers of late. Maybe it's just be, but I continue to be extremely unimpressed by the shape of their torque curves.

Because
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1448035230

And emilio likes them so they have to be good.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1448035778

Reliability close to an N/A, but all the power up top like a low boost track setup. If you're going for slow car fast that is.

I don't buy the reliability close to N/A. More power = more heat. No matter what form.

You just make less of it so its more reliable. Turn down the turbo boost and you get the same thing.

You and brain and many others, and you know what?

WE'RE ALL HATERS

HATERZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

refer to your Politically Correct Baww thread for addtl info

Agreed, though even with turning down the boost on turbo the low end tq delivery will be much greater than rotrex application. Less tq in this area possibly equals to reliability in my mind at least.

I think the slow car fast theme comes into play with rotrex getting the most out of your slightly boosted N/A step in the upper rpm range.

I'd like to see concealer's Gross car with a rotrex :D

My low boost setting is less than 150ft/lbs of torque. EWG or a really low boost actuator does the same thing but lets you do more.

I own a water cooled twin turbo F150 that was designed for durability and torture tested and despite that there have been some turbo failures. I'm not convinced that non water cooled turbos in a race track environment are gonna last. What's the average lifespan in miles? 10K, 20K 30K? Anyone know?

Why would you use non watercooled turbo? That would reduce the life.

Whats the lifespan of a rotrex?

I wasn't aware that the turbos Miata guys are using are water cooled.

You do realize there is more than 1 turbo in this world.

I'd say that the split is probably somewhere around 60% WC / 40% non-WC, or something around that. Maybe slightly higher numbers for WC, as my own observations are likely skewed towards the cheapskate side of the community.


A lot of folks are still running old Greddy kits which came with non-WC Mitsu turbos, and a lot of folks buy cheap Chinese-made turbos, many (most?) of which seem to also be non-WC.

What I'll call the "mainstream" Miata turbo packages mostly use Garrett 25/28-series turbos, which are all water-cooled. And more recently, the "all of it" crowd have been discovering the BorgWarner EFR series, which are also water-cooled.


And there are yet other "minority" turbos out there as well from manufacturers like IHI, Holset, etc. Again, some WC, some not. There's even one (can't recall who makes it) which comes with a "permanently greased" center section. Weird.

You see about the same split phenomenon in the sleeve-bearing vs. ball-bearing decision.

thanks

You realize that water cooling really just does what it needs to do when you shut the car off hot right?
So this discussion is dumb, and you should learn how turbo's work.

I've been trying to find some good photos of a current-gen F1 turbocharger. Not coming up with much.


Regardless... My point wasn't "turbocharger is better than supercharger" per se. Positive-displacement superchargers still have a large and loyal following, and I can understand why; they have no boost threshold, no spoolup time, and can produce maximum PR right off idle. So for a drag-racer, or someone who spends their whole life below 4,000 RPM, I can totally see the appeal.

I just don't understand centrifugals. They produce the least-flat torque curve of anything, and don't offer any advantage which I can perceive over any alternative form of forced induction. Regardless of whether you're on the street or the tack, I just can't see why you'd want to only ever be able to produce peak torque at peak RPM. That concept does not positively correlate with the maximization of either fun or reliability.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but what do you mean maximum PR right off idle?
My MP62, and most others I've seen only build 3-4 psi and then slowly taper up to 10 or so at redline in both the cold side and hot side variation. The 45s offer even less.

The really big ones produce way more from the get go, but this is not the case with the 46 or 62. Though even that much is still enough to make a healthy improvement in low end, of course.

I was under the impression that the water cooling prevents coking of oil in the turbo. Isn't that a good feature?

Yes, my Whipple will make more and more boost as you rev it. The SC lets air leak past the rotors/screws, so at low RPM since they spin slower, more air leaks back so less boost. With more RPM, the SC becomes more efficient. Also, at high RPMs, the motor's VE drops but the SC's doesn't drop hardly any, so again, boost builds because of this.

My setup makes 22 PSI at 8,000, 5 PSI at 2,000, 12 PSI at 3,000. Those are the only numbers I know off the top of my head.

Correct, but when the oil is moving, it's not gonna bake on, it spends almost no time inside the turbo before draining back.
It's when you shut the car off and the oil is no longer being pressurized through the chra that you need the water to cool the chra off as fast as possible to prevent what you're talking about.

Operation is kinda like of the oem "oil cooler" which is really a heater.
Yep that's what I've observed. Yours is a relatively big charger too, compared to the normal ones used on miata's.

Why not.

CF blowers can be intercooled without altering throttled volume, unlike most PD blower setups. The only way to do that with a PD setup is a dual-throttle hotside blower, and nobody offers that in an off-the-shelf solution.

The rising torque with RPM makes the car easier to manage on track, and the lower average power output results in less strain on the cooling system.

I think turbos are better, but I can absolutely see why CF blowers are popular, and for some people, they are the right solution.

More power makes more heat, but with the SC that heat is mostly sent on out through the exhaust, where with the turbo it is contained and made to do work inside the engine bay. There is significantly more heat in the engine bay with the turbo because of this. Engine bay heat management is a non-issue with the Rotrex.

The some people are people who:
* want some more power
* want to keep reliability
* want ease of installation & maintenance
* the absolutely predictable torque delivery is better for novices, and preferred by some advanced drivers.


What Aidan is lacking is the 8-10 years of watching various forced induction track pioneers on this board blazing a laborious trail towards trackdaybro reliability. It didn't just happen.

So back on topic. I talked to JR at MRLS this year and they said they were having overheating issues with the kit. So they developed a 2 in one radiator/oilcooler, where the cooler is built into the rad as a single unit. I believe it was an oil cooler.... anywho cant remember exactly what the rep said about the release date, just my .02

That doesnt sound correct being that the maximum operating temperature of the rotrex is well below engine coolant temperatures.

From what I've read i believe its an engine oil cooler.

CSF is making a custom radiator with an oil cooler in it exclusively for Jackson Racing for NA's and NB's.

CSF announces The "O" Series - CSF Racing

They have an MSRP of $650 for the Subaru STI versions, but it says the Miata version should already be out, but just like everything else that deals with Jackson Racing... it is late to the show.

I have no idea what they plan to supply to get the oil to the radiator in the first place.

Is it a water to air oil cooler? Or is it an air to oil over like next to the water.

Aidan it is a radiator with two separate tanks. One for oil one for coolant. Unless I am totally mistaken.

FM used to sell one, they quit. Not enough demand and iirc not effective enough for people who truly needed an oil cooler.

I believe they are trying to solve overheating issues on a stock radiator due to the rotrex cooler impeding airflow. So, the dual cooler. Each side gets fresh air.

But it will be behind the AC condenser. Rotrex states the oil should always be <180F. So I'm curious to see if it will actually work.

A real radiator with modest ducting will always work better IMO.

I should try reading the damn links posted.

Featuring a robust 4-plate liquid-to-oil plate-type oil cooler built into the bottom endtank. A liquid-to-oil cooler is much more efficient than a conventional air-oil cooler. Lab tested in CSF”s ISO certified in-house lab testing facility to reject heat better and at a faster rate than a 10 row air-to-oil cooler. In addition, by being placed in the bottom endtank, the oil temperature is regulated by the thermostat of the cooling system. Never have to worry about operating temperatures not warming up fast enough in cold weather climates.

So its better than a 10 row oil cooler. But also heats up your water pretty good.

It's good for a bolt in option, but not game changing. IMO.

IMHO the problem with a dual cooler is that you're taking away frontal area from the radiator in order to give it to the oil cooler, and all that does is make the car overheat before the oil could get hot enough to need the cooler.

--Ian

Basically it's a built-in Laminova. Huh.

Yeah that makes sense.

The radiator load will increase with the heated oil so its certainly not a freebie situation. And lets not neglect the fact that if there is any oil/water contamination it will quickly kill the engine.