No, they didn't just throw in higher compression pistons because they thought it was cool. They threw them in because they wanted to have their cake and eat it too. The problem with these new generation higher compression DI engines is that they are built for efficiency while still claiming to get the power of a larger engine. This is the DI marketing hype. It's a fact, DI or not, higher static compression exponentially raises cylinder pressure and heat. My point is that we would have a bit more legroom in our factory block if it wasn't for the greedy design of this engine. This type of design may work fine for well planned stock configurations, but when power modding begins, there is less room for error and growth than in a classic lower compression turbo engine. Some engines are built stronger, but ours doesn't appear to be strong enough and that is why we are here discussing it. If we understand the weakness of our design, only then can we even try to prevent against it.

The 3.5 Ecoboost only runs up to 12psi stock for a reason. I couldn't find any boost info on the new Fiat 1.8L. The Cobalt is obviously built pretty well, but even they were smart enough to scale back static compression a tad and seemingly threw in better internals. Only time will tell.

So tune out the tq spike and throw in a double stacked copper HG. I guess that doesn't really lower the static CR all that much...

Oh, and remember when the Cobb AP came out? the v101's may have been a joke but the v102's were a bit better. The big complaint everyone had was that the Cobb OTS maps put the "Wild Child" on Ritalin lol. For the V103's, everyone wanted the wild child back and they wanted the kid jacked up sweet tarts and pixie sticks...We asked for it, and we got it. Christian gave us back that mid-range tq spike. Is it a coincidence that the time frame in which that happened up until now is when we've seen the majority of our motors blow? (obviously this excludes users of other tunes).

Maybe, just maybe, Christian knew what he was doing. Not a sermon, just a thought. (lulz).

^ Does that correlate directly to the throttle smoothing in the 103 beta maps or is there more to it than that?

+1 on this...the first OTS maps were, in my eyes, improvements over the stock tune as it moved the power up the rpm range enough that you'll still get power when you stayed on it (like on a road course) but civil enough that you can putter around town like the regular Mazda3 and stay stealth and incognito (I live in a large urban centre where any form of street racing/stunt driving = automatic 1-week impound + fines).

The big hp guys bitched and moaned and haltech jumped in to create the "hotter" MSF maps with the "boost spike" and "boost taper" to bring the wild child back. It was such a huge dif that on the shoutbox, haltech told me to take a week or so to re-adapt my driving. Mind you, this was also about the time that Cobb realized the 1.01 maps were had bad tables in them.

In the back of my mind, I always wondered what would happen if Cobb could have stayed the "high road" so to speak and tuned it the way they wanted to rather than what the HP junkies dictated. Or maybe have 2 strategies, as Cobb road raced their car...rather than just for power/roll racing/drag racing.

Guys, this is not intended to make you think the rods are the weakest mechanical link in our engine. They clearly are. They are probably the weakest link in most engines as this is the MOST common high power type of engine failure. This was intended to point out that in order to make the best of the internals we have, not be at risk, and make more usable power, the torque we generate at the low RPMs should be ramped up slower and moved further down. Of course putting in aftermarket forged rods moves the overhead much higher up - this is not to argue that it won't help.

The first problem you're going to run into is that the stock turbo won't flow enough to make the torque late in the power band if you are shooting for power on stock internals, so the first thing I would do is get a properly sized turbo with a properly sized exhaust housing (read bigger). This will slow spool and move torque up the RPM curve at the same time.

If you're still on stock turbo, ramp up the boost so that at the low RPMs you don't spike (especially in 4th gear and above that as they are high load gears). I wouldn't want to spike more than 17-18psi when getting on it in the low RPMs and work the boost up from there. Follow this up with enough fuel and timing such that KR is low to none. This type of tuning is much more forgiving compared to a stock tune car with many flow mods.

i guarantee you, Mazda has not fixed the rods. They built the rods to spec.. If a customer blows a rod, they know why it happened and will deny the warranty. Why would Mazda redesign the rod to be stronger when the dont want the car to be modified to begin with? They will deny the warranty and be done with it.

Ford did the same thing with the lightning. What came out of it was, when the Terminator was introduced (03/04 cobra) they went straight to forged rods/pistons because they KNEW the after market would push those cars to huge limits. Ford wanted that recognition and all of their SVT vehicles now, have built lower ends. Mazda could give 2 shits less about notoriety at this point. There fastest sports car is infact, a Mazdaspeed 3, not an RX8.

You have to fix the problem on your own. Everyone knows about it, so it comes down to, if you arent willing to pay to play, dont touch the car. Be a man about your mistakes and own up to the cost.

Hal, at the same time you and other have been running well at up to 50% more power than stock.

When are you going to realize... that car companies do NOT build the car so enthusiast can make 200-300hp over their design? It comes down to money.. What kind of car can we build for the average guy, that makes power, but is still PROFITABLE? Thats the bottom line, MONEY. They do not sit around the table and say " we need to build the motor to take 600hp for these enthusiast guys. " We account for less then 5% of their total sales, who mod the vehicle after purchase.

DI is not a weak design, nor the higher compression or higher boost ability. Look at the ecoboost technology as an example. If SVT gets a hold of a Ecoboost engine in a car, they will forge it and design a healthier fuel source at the same time.

At least today, Ford has recognized the enthusiast market and builds their SVT line for those people. Thing is, you do end up paying for the primo parts, but it does yield anywhere from 50-70% increase power over the stock power levels. This is new to Ford, but not to chevy. Chevy has overbuilt their engines for quite sometime starting with the LT5, then to the LS1, LS2, etc.. But that technology does trickle down from the Vette engines. Ford has just recently caught onto it and it saves a lot of warranty issues.

I think out of all the JDM gook muscle, DSM with their EVO platform affords a lot of power without going into the lower end and rebuilding. Scoobies on the other hand, do not, just like many of flavors of gook muscle. Nissan use to have some stout bottom ends as well, but i dont know about their current models aside from the GTr.

True, but im a car guy with a lot of experience. I dont flog the car on hot days, or constantly beat the shit out of it. I change my oil freq, i check my plugs weekly and i take care of the car.

I also dial my tunes in, which is key to success. I also dont load the car up down low to often. But, i can suffer the same fate as others have. It comes down to experience and how you respect the car.

Also, one thing to bring up here. People who start blown engine threads never come clean about WHAT they did. They are embarrassed and dont want to be called a dumbshit. So, they act as if the car just blew. 8 times out of 10, it was owner induced, but they wont own up to it publicly. Theres only been a few guys who have owned up to it since 2007.

If you run a big turbo on a stock bottom end, i hope you got money put away because you are ticking away with a bomb. It costs you more money to build when you blow, then the build the bottom end before you strap a 1300 cfm air pump on the car.

Does anyone know what happened to JimmyMac? He was in the process of building his motor with Carrillo rods and the stock pistons last we heard because he bent a rod from overboosting on his gt28(?). Palerider, I know you hung out with that kid before. where is he at? what happend? someone should give that kid a call and tell him to update us...

Last time jimmy posted was March 9th and his last forum login was March 16th.

Here are all 18 of his threads...

http://www.mazdaspeedforums.org/foru...earchid=713064


He may have sold the car, who knows.

If I were to do anything about this bottom end as a precautionary step, just replacing the rods with Carrillos would be it so he was on the right track.

"New to Ford" Right. The company that built at least a +50% blowup margin into the 5.0, the nearly indestructible, if very tractorish, 2.3 Turbo, The 2.0 Cosworth, etc. They have a long history of overbuilding performance engines. You're right that companies today building a sub 30K car don't have as much monetary headroom to build what they like. The cheaper the car is, the more compromises are in it; especially these days, when consumers expect so much but don't want to pay for it.

I wonder how much FoMoCo design is actually in this engine. Legit question, I don't really know. There's FoMoCo on all kinds of things on the engine. The chassis is Euro Focus, too.

the MS3 in stock form is a winning formula (back-to-back C/D 10Best, 2007 and 2008)...once you start fucking around with any one of the variables in that formula, you can't expect the car to be the same. Who knew you'd fuck your warranty when you start making 100whp over stock in a 35K CDN grocery getter...

so basically this is wen you go WOT in a ms6
http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/521...daspeed604.jpg

YUP! LOL

Well you cant count the older ford tech from 80s and early 90s in this one. Their modular platform was major dogshit until 2003 when they grew a set of balls and did shit right. They finally listened that people arent going to keep buying mustangs that got walked all day long by huge cubed camaros.

The MZR was definitely a feeler engine for both Ford and Mazda. I highly doubt they thought they would get a huge market from this platform because of the low build numbers.

QFT!:notworthy:

Come on man, you are preachin' to the choir on this subject. Who said anything about expecting 200-300 HP for free? It sounds like most of us agree on the basic principles here. You said it was about cylinder compression. I agreed and told you how and why they could have made it better by lowering the static compression. Do you not agree with this assessment? I am simply pointing out another reason why we aren't one of the lucky platforms that does have some room to grow without often witnessing the epic fail tale. I am one of those that would be happy with a reliable 300whp on this little FWD. I am content with this car for now, but I am a little disappointed...I'm sure this is a common feeling around here. Hell, we even have some close to stock cars blowing up with only 25-50 added HP/TQ. For a car that is setup to spike 17-18psi stock, I expected a little higher tolerance until failure. Without much of a cost difference at all, they could have lowered the compression and relieved some of the stress on the engine. This wasn't smart at all as a manufacturer if they were in it to make money as they are going back to fix their problems quite frequently from what I have been reading. Even if they don't fix it, it gives them a bad name whether they are in the right or wrong. And yes, you are very right that many companies know better when they put their racing division stamp on their product.

Ok I'm coming clean on something....I shot off the line today and WOT the car, hit a truck rut and skyshotted the motor off the limiter in second gear. It threw a giant CEL right there but ran fine after. I took a look under hood and everything looked fine. I cleared the code by disco the battery and it didn't come back. Howd'ya like that, a CEL stupidometer! :theyareontome:

Anybody got any links I can learn more about who really developed this engine?

Ken

FUCKING THANK YOU .......................... no more of a true statement there bud :iconcur:

People also have to understand that some failures will happen because nothing is made perfectly. Some engines are destined to go to heaven from the get go. Others are mis-used. Tune it and treat it properly and it will most likely last.

If you look carefully through the blown engine thread you will find very few people that properly care for the car and is calibrated (tuned) for their modifications that blew. Even when they are making low to mid 300whp and a ton of torque.

You know what we're missing here? We're missing the stories of the guys making 400, 500whp on stock internals. Then you can say Bob blew at 300 but Jim had 500 on a dyno on the stock bottom end so Bob musta had his shit screwed up. People's opinions and minds are funny like that :) And the fact that we don't have 500whp is not a function of the internals.

the fact that we dont see 500whp dynos is not a function of internals, its a function of shit design. gt35r turbos cranked, and yet they stop making power after 20 psi......sounds like more then internals to me.

And what aspect of that design is shit sir? So that we know exactly what to address.

:rofl2:

Of course they built rods to spec, I dont think you're understanding my aspect of the argument...I was saying there was NOT a design problem (therefore no need to redesign ro change the specs) but that something during the manufacturing process was occassionally going wrong (inpurity in the metal? or in the chamber?) that could cause a few of the rods to turn out weaker than others. Couple this with a bad tune and/or some other issue and you could blow the motor.

There have been some instances of stock cars blowing up, mazda in most cases warrantees these cars...my point is they have looked at it I'm sure, and if it was something in the process (NOT A SPEC PROBLEM!) they probably addressed under the table as I already stated.

Very true...Ford's coyote (next year) is going to be the shit!

lol so the motor doesn't blow with a gt35 and you blame the rods. Try again.

I'll give you a hint:
1. Fuel
2. Tuning

don't know but im sure as hell not spending 25k plus to find out.
head, built motor, giant turbo, intake manifold, exhaust manifold, cams.....fuck that shit.

"I’m Luke Skywalker, I’m here to rescue you.....from your driving”

:beerchug:

:hug:

Not to be an ass or anything but you did spend 25k and didn't even get to find out :)

CEL.......change engine light.....

I said CYLINDER PRESSURE, not cylinder compression. If im preaching, why are you the one whining? If they lowered the compression with direct injection, it will LOSE power.Direct Injection requires higher compression per its design, just like a diesel does.

Another note to make is that the negative timing advance actually promotes spool by lighting off later in the cycle. Has anyone tried increasing timing during spool. My AP is on the way so I will be playing with these shortly myself.

Geez, I'm learning so much here...I have fundementally changed how I went about making my maps.......Lex...really looking forward to what you figure out with AP. :banana: I just uploaded my new map with this threads theory's to see how it reacts. It may not look radically different from anyones but it is from my previous ones. Not sure if anyone is interested but I will attach what I have done.

I wish I could add my theory's but I don't know jack squat about compression and pressure relating to how it works with DI....but I do know my car pretty well and will monitor and report my results.

How does the car drive after these changes?

I changed the map at work today, so I only have 30 miles....Wednesday, I will put on 60 more miles so I will go WOT around 90 miles....

I have accelerated normally....I'm not babying it but I'm not going into boost. I want the car to learn the map this way. The placebo effect says I actually like the feel from a stop but I will save my true judging after 50 miles.

The car was designed for road racing, not drag racing. Road racing doesnt require 100hp. Thats why all mazda offered is a weak intake and catback. Why the intake was made without the air straightener, beats me. Maybe that was AEMs fault.


Stalker :neener:

Download all the maps from COBB and compare.
aaronc7 did the work already. Link.

What people dont understand is that cylinder pressure is not psi on your trusty dashhawk. That psi is messured in the intake manifold. Cylinder pressure has to do with timing, boosted air temp, boost and many more factors.



I would like to see what romraider or another form of opensource tuning can do for the Mazdaspeed ecu. In the Subaru world there are some maps on the ecu that romraider can access while the AP cant.



Anyone want to give it a try? I'll step up to the plate if there are other supporters.
:Thinkingof_: