Waiting to see if this really helps, i would deff get this based on some simple test



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well I have been running the BS Fan Controller [BlueStreak] for a lil over a week now and can tell you that it has drastically lowered my city driving ECTs. They have gone from 214-219 to 195-205 with the fan ON trigger set to 205. I suspect I could keep them under 200 easily with another programming session to lower the thresholds. AMB temps were 85* high humidity.

information about this beta unit can be found in my build thread. I don't know Dave's plan for production of this unit and there is a little AC control issue to work out but I am liking the progress so far.

http://www.mazdaspeedforums.org/foru...5/#post2091337

Made one more one off unit before I wrap up making them. Just gotta pop it in my Speed for a few cycles to make sure it checks out then the controller gets shipped to a certain someone :smlove2: I have a DD now so testing can only happen on weekends.

After that, I'll let you guys know where I'm going with this. :drive:

In my car would be a great start:32:

I would imagine this new controller would be the easiest way to control ECT temps along with more efficient shrouding for all of us with FMIC.. I've PM'd ya about it and u know I would love to run it,as I'm sure others would love to run the controller too!

The p/n for the old thermostat seems to be L32715170.

UPDATE: I've just found the DAYCO p/n fof MS3/MS6 thermostat - DT140A. But there is no online datasheet for it. See the application list: http://www.dayco.com.au/buyersguide.aspx?P=DT140A
Their downloadable catalogues say that MS3 needs a DT130G thermostat, which ir 89C or 192F! See the application list: http://www.dayco.com.au/buyersguide.aspx?P=DT130G

DT140A application list contains only turbocharged petrol and diesel vehicles. I think I should request for its temperature.

There is also the Gates thermostat - its p/n is TH45182G1. But some sources say it is 180F.

More air to radiator for FMIC users.
I live in Las Vegas- it's damn hot. 100 degrees by breakfast.
If you have a CAI, you can do this scoop on both sides. Going to do the same thing on both sides of the FMIC next.

http://imageshack.us/a/img21/8619/topcgk.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img14/9326/top2qm.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img211/6521/fronteau.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img692/7739/50326928.jpg

I don't really know what I can contribute to this topic and if any of my experience means jack to anyone here, some of it is based off of wag, and some of it is based of factory listed specs, the factory thermostat and fan thermo trigger are set at @210*, why so high? emissions, can a engine using the oem ecu use a different thermostat, yes but I forsee complications, mainly because the fan thermo trigger will still only trigger under 2 distinct conditions, one that the coolant reaches 210 or the a/c is triggered on via the pump clutch.
The cap is supposed to provide @28-30PSI of coolant pressurization which moves the boiling point up and helps to eliminate pump cavitation and air pockets within the coolant ports.
Having said that and not to rub it in I run standalone engine management so I can do whatever the fuck I want lol, I run a AWR/Ron Davis dual pass radiator equipped with 2 12" Spal 1250cfm puller fans triggered by 3 separate ways, one - the a/c pump clutch, two - 180* inline thermo switch and three- a manual toggle switch on my console, I also replaced the oem 210* thermostat with a 180*....and the real beauty of the up rated cooling system is the fact the oil cooler is tied into it, in additiona as if this was not enough I also run a 7"x11" deraile air oil cooler that uses a 170* thermostatic valve....oil capacity is increased to right around 5.5 quarts, the oil gets rested longer and stays cooler and it's temperature stays near a static ceiling of 180-190* even under very heavy loads and hot track days, win WIN.

Is this absolutely necessary.....oh fuck no, it really depends on generally the operations of the engine and the power output, heat is energy, energy is power, the more power you make the more heat waste the cooling system must off set, that is my take, and I admittingly always tend to overbuild.

I haven't checked in here in awhile but have been posting in my build thread. The BS controller is working perfectly in my car in tandem with the OEM controller @ 95* AMB. ECT tops out at 203ish max now [ my set point] whereas before it would reach 217 all the time and if sitting in traffic with AC off it would see 219-220. I am running an OEM replacement tstat so its the slower opening version of the 190* that everyone bitches about but still no issues. I think this controller with a true 180 tstat would solve issues for everyone.

SPEEDPERF6RMANC3 has the schematic and is getting PCBs produced now IIRC so it wont be too long before this is available for everyone.

Can't wait man!

I'm surprised nobody has stepped up to build or find a true 180 degree t-stat replacement.

Seems MUCH easier to do than some of the hurdles we've seen accomplished over the last couple years.

even with a 180 tstat you will need a fan controller. so if you can only have one, the fan controller is the better choice.

well we have that now, we just need the thermostat

Dan, the fan coming on keeps your ECTs cooler in traffic, but does this do anything for how long it takes to get ECTs high while driving hard/spiritedly? Does it delay this kind of heat buildup?

I haven't monitored this directly yet as I am working on making enough power for it to matter :) 350whp doesn't generate THAT much heat...lol

I can say that while flashing maps, since the key is in the ACC position, the fan will come on and cycle off so ECT has to be <203 while I am making map switches between runs..FWTW. I am going to add a switch to disable the aux controller while flashing maps. right now I just unplug the fuse.

You may also be alluding to the fact that a tstat that fully opens at a lower temp will cycle coolant faster from the rad to the block which IMO WOULD aid in preventing heat buildup in the motor.

This will be interesting to see because while in traffic, having higher ECTs (as designed by Mazda) is not going to hurt the car. High ECTs (above 220) and caning it may as this overwhelms the cooling package with more power than OEM and what it was designed for.

I don't think we should be too worried about ECTs putting around town but rather how much longer we have under high load if we start at 203 instead of 217*F.

exactly my thinking...not that it hurts the car to run 217 just tooling around but, i'd rather start a WOT run at 185-203 than 217-220.

Also wanted to add that even with my AC on, the aux controller still kicks in quite often so you still get more cooling even with AC on.

So... i have a question. We know that Methanol and E85 will cool the charge temps / cylinder temps when being used. However, those on larger frame turbos are capable of making (around) the same horsepower on 93 alone... Are we speaking apples to apples to say that X horsepower needs X cooling, or should things like fuel be taken into consideration? For instance, is a car making 350 whp on 93 generating more heat than one making 400 on E85? Or vice versa, a larger turbo making 400 whp on 93 vs 350 on E85?

I understand the matter is neither created or destroyed, it simply changes state principle, but if the E85 / methanol is taking heat out of the charge air where does it go? converted to energy (horsepower?) and then simply burned off as heat again?

May have answered my own question there, but interested to see what others have to say.

I would to say energy in its most basic form is heat as I understand the principle ie 400 up from e85 or 93 pump is going to produce the same amount of heat waste. As a whole btu is btu xxx% gets displaced through the exhaust (while driving the turbine) xxx% moves the pistons down and xxx% is absorbed by the coolant system.
Now a fuel like nitromethane is entirely a different story but how many real street cars use it? NONE despite the movie bullshit FF tries to portray.

Generally speaking more hp created will put more heat into the block and cooling system.

e85 is just providing detonation resistance, not removing overall heat from the package. Same with Methanol.

I dont mean to sound argumentative when i say this, just wanting to clear it up for my own understanding.

When you dump alcohol on your hand, be it Methanol, ethanol ... you can feel it "cool" as it evaporates, and the same principle takes place inside the cylinders does it not? Why then would some of the heat not be taken out?

My hypothesis to my above question: Does the Alcohol remove heat from the charge air, but once the spark plug fires and theres the actual combustion event all bets are off because THAT will generate "X" amount of heat depending on horsepower?

Considering people are registering >1700F exhaust temps, even with e85 and meth, meanwhile meth cools boost temps by 40-50F at best, I don't think it's going to make enough of a temperature difference in the engine....

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

If you added the alcohol fueling and or water, but didn't up the power at all, it probably reduces the load on the cooling system somewhat. The math would probably tell you how much. Like said above. I don't expect it to be very significant. Remember you are rejecting 2-3hp for every hp at the wheels.

The problem is, as soon as you use the cooling to advance timing, you rebalance the equation for the percentage that goes out the tailpipe, the percentage that ends up at the wheels, and the percentage that ends up in the coolant. Conceptually, advancing timing reduces the amount of energy that goes out the exhaust valve, and puts it to the wheels and into the coolant. This increased captured energy shows up as higher peak combustion temperature and pressure.

So then the question is, if two cars were making 400hp at the wheels what difference would the fuel make if both cars are on an optimized tune? Well the car running gasoline would have less timing, and more energy headed out the exhaust valve, but the captured energy would be the same, and would be distributed at the same ratio as the alcohol fueled car.

Even water injection doesn't change this much. Essentially what it does is increase the heat carrying capacity of the exhaust gases, so they carry the same amount of heat out, but because the heat capacity is higher, it is a lower temperature.

The ratio of power to the wheels vs power into the coolant system is a function of the physical design of the combustion chamber, and is primarily dependent on the size of the chamber relative to its volume. It's one reason why rotaries get such bad mpg, their combustion chamber is a long thin sliver, meaning lots of surface area for a given volume, and a higher ratio of energy lost to the coolant system relative to energy sent to the wheels.

One of the big advances in engine design was the change from a panhead with its excess volume, and very flat head to OHV engines with hemispherical heads, which when simplified moved the shape of the combustion volume closer to its ideal shape, which is a sphere, being that spheres have the least surface area for a given volume.

Detonation is by definition a uncontrolled ignition of fuel be it pump or e85, uncontrolled flame front event, this can be caused by several things, a hot spot within the cylinder, excessively lean afr, which can in itself can be caused by many different aspects, poor tuning, faulty injector, low fuel pressure/bad malfunctioning pump etc

Anyway the quenching effect of injecting methanol or use of ethanol stabilizes the flame front pre combustion, but after the combustion has taking place heat is still energy and energy what nets the power output of the engine

I'm not a engineer and I'm sure someone could explain this topic better

Good analogy Ziggo, basically the same as asking the question which sponge will absorb more water? A wet or a dry sponge? A: a wet one will

Why not just override the a/c pressure switch ?

All meth or eth does is cool the BAT and/or in cylinder temperature prior to the spark event due to their much higher latent heat of evaporation compared to the same amount of gas required for the targeted AFR.

I seem to recall running the numbers (or seeing it done) about 2 years ago that showed that the relative heats of combustion in the E85 vs 93 scenarios was within about 5% (E85 being a little higher), thus the total amount of energy to be released in the form of heat from their combustion is very similar.

The peak in-cylinder temps would thus end up at very similar points all else held constant since the E85 cylinder temps would be starting from a lower temp due to the previously mentioned difference in the latent heats of evaporation.

In for win!

In for legalizing ghey marriage.

I can't add much enlightenment to this discussion, but I posted this in a different thread already and it seems to be applicable to this thread too.

"Z3 Coolant Plate" mazdaspeed 07 09 Mazda Speed Hatchback Eyelids MS3 Bodykit | eBay

FYI - you can order this without the cutouts for the TMIC vents (so you wouldn't need the CS inserts to block off the vents) and they make in Fiberglass and CF

Look under the lip of you hood, there should be a rubber gasket that seals when the hood is closed to the top surface of the radiator frame, so IMO a dedicated diverter does basically nothing more, now making and installing side shrouding would be more effective because air flow seems to wash to the sides.

A bottom shroud catching air from the ground and pushing it up between the intercooler core and radiator would be a simple and easy way to help with temps.


Also containing air from escaping from the top with a block plate between the grill and rad support is a great idea and hnda etr mentioned.

Think theres enough room? Just a quick glance at mine looks like there isn't but maybe 1-2 inches, seems like that would only divert air to a very small section of the bottom of the radiator. I guess more is more, but still.

That's the shape to start- there's another pic that shows it bent down toward radiator. With FMIC you don't need the air through the hood anymore.

rerouting the scoops downward and using a CAI is a big improvement.
Ducts at both ends of FMIC to keep too much air passing into wheel arches is a good thing, and a bottom scoop directing air behind the FMIC is also great idea.

But all this only works while car is moving-

Electric fans with a manual control t-stat is easy and effective.

this thread is for coolant temps not intercooler temps which is what he was trying to assist with. Blocking off the air that USED to go to the tmic and rerouting it past the radiator was his point I believe but what do I know lol.

yeah- air to the radiator. More.

You wouldn't want to scoop air off the ground as it's always hotter than the air slightly above (due to the sun heating the roadway.)

But still cooler than your radiator.

More=cooler

Cooler=better

My point being there are better places to get it from.
If anything, you'd want to vent the hood by the windshield and create a belly pan so all the air coming in the grill shoots out the top.

If not, black crinkle paint on the trans pan & oil pan has been proven to help dissipate heat.

I flushed out my coolant for full water plus additive (Mocool). I noticed an average of about ~15F cooler on the road and at the track this weekend. The street is used to run about 190F on the highway now its 175F, on track I was hitting 230F now I'm at 215F consistently. Not other modifications were to the system. I feel in conjunction with Dave's fan controller this should be enough for a lot of people.

How much additive? or is it just one of those "one bottle per X liters" type of deals? Here in Houston it rarely ever sees freezing so i've thought quite a bit about going straight water, but it does freeze here occasionally ...