The PCV system is not perfect. However, if you DO recirculate to the intake you WILL have oil deposits. All cars have this, not just the Mazda. EGR makes the problem worse.

Not spraying fuel on the valves combined with heat bakes the mixture on. Nothing new here.

Having a non contaminated intake stream is great but that means the PCV system can't vent into the manifold which is like so for emissions purposes.

We're talking about blowing motors here however. I experienced a repeatable KR spike of 5-7 on the hwy going WOT after driving for 20 minutes. This was on the stock tune and bolt-ons with boost spiking above 20psi.

Swapped to an FMIC, pulled back 3 degrees of VVT advance, and my boost does not spike above 18-19psi. Guess what? No more KR spike no matter how I floor it and after how long of a hwy drive.

Quelling the boost spike through tuning and the FMIC (more lag means control system controlled spike better) meant a slower boost ramp-up with a lower overall spike and it put me below the detonation threshold. Everything else about the car stayed the same.

So now I know the car is working correctly and not detonating. This is what I'm trying to get across to people. Keep KR at bay, keep spikes low (esp at low RPM), get a fuel pump for higher boost, and the motor will be just fine.

EDIT:

The DISI motor is very efficient and relatively high compression. This is why we make the great stock torque we do (back to the OP of this thread). But that great high compression and efficiency also results in a lower detonation threshold.

Has anyone confirmed that it creates anymore heat in the combustion chamber then any other type of driving? My EGT's were always lowest when cruising at a steady 70 MPH (around 700 to 880 depending on how much of a grade I was on). At idle I normally saw 600 to 680 (depended on how long it idled for).

If people talking about the combustion chambers getting hot during cruise don't know the actual details and are making assumptions, well that is not through testing.

Have you tested a completely failed PCV system to see how much oil it in facts sucks up? Do you know for sure that a failed PCV system will cause a hydrolock condition?

Yes, but we need to address what causes the detonation. Just saying that they detonate does nothing, fixing the problem is key to making the motors last a long time.

Is it safe to say that oil vapors or oil accumulation is happening in these motors? If so, wouldn't addressing this issue first be a starting point to addressing the problem?

^ Yes, hwy cruise causes high EGTs. Not as high as sustained WOT, but higher than in-city driving.

:pat::pat::pat:, so according to you knock is causing detonation. If that were the case, when on the dyno you would see the power fall off... but wait... we don't see the TQ fall off in the lower RPM's. So, help me and others understand what is happening. I have seen 50 + DISI motors on the dyno all of them from fully built to bone stock. I have yet to see a car loose TQ due to knock or detonation on the dyno.

Lex, have you confirmed your finding on whether or not you changes made to the tune actually helped the motor? Have you dynoed it with the old tune, then your changes made? If what your saying is in fact causing the problem, everyone should be able to get their car to see no knock and we will never see another blown motor on the site, right? Last time I checked people making those few changes are still blowing motors and they are not blowing under WOT, its only after long non-agreessive driving and then rolling into the throttle, most of the time they never even make it to peak boost before the motor destroy's itself. That my friend, has nothing to do with peak this or TQ that, its something else inducing the detonation or causing a hydrolock condition.

You have personally verified this? You have an EGT gauge on your car or are we making assumptions? If you do, I want to see video proof of such testing. 2 miles in the city and then 2 miles on the freeway should suffice. I will take the peaks and lows generate an average and then compair the two. This only seems fair to test this way so we can confirm the results.

Cruise is usually just a bit under WOT.

Quick search on evom:
metric units ^


Sorry i don't have time to search more, but yes... they are hot during cruise.

And those are port injection motors, where the fuel gets to atomize in the heads intake ports, cooling them off and also cooling the combustion chamber off more than us.

We have an injector squirting in a localized area in the combustion chamber during cruise, which cools off that localized area quite nicely, but allows the remainder of the chamber to heat soak. This is what lex has been saying for some time.

And we need actual EGT testing not calculated DH or Cobb numbers. Those are calculated numbers and will not be a fair representation of the results.

wow a complete blow up. thats nuts. i hardly ever go in 6th gear unless im on the free way and i normally am going at least 80 so no worries.

Thanks for the explaination though, the more i know the better off i am.

PTP, not sure if your aware of this, but our ecu's are capable of actually pulling timing when it detects detonation via the knock sensor. 99% of the time the ecu is quick enough to save the motor and avoid any real significant knock.

But even then, power drops due to pulled timing are more than obvious on a dyno. Maybe you should read back through your 50+ dyno sheets and data logs again.



Also, since you seem to be demanding so much proof, maybe it's time to give us some proof of the endless hours of mad scientist testing you've been doing for the past 2 years.

Last bit of experimentation proof i've seen from you was when you were squirting meth through an intake manifold while it was off the car, with no air being blown through it, and no simulation of intake valves, etc etc. Lets see the goods from your oil pooling proof plz :D

For the oil hydrolocking, I think it is more likely the oil collecting in the PCV box on the side of the block being moved in a single event then the oil in the bottom of the IM.

What? So we are looking at a conventional injected motor vs the DISI motor? WHAT!!! port injection runs cooler combustion chamber temps than DI? When did this happen? DJ, you have it way backwards and from your post you are just speculating on what the "ACTUAL" numbers are :lame::wow::lame:. So no one has taken the time to verify what the actual EGT's are, am I getting this right? So much for proper testing, :smokin:.

Yes, Lex says a lot but what are his testing parameters? What has he done up to this point to prove his therory's? What I am getting from this is there were a lot of steps skipped to verify the actual causes of the problem. Making assumptions is going to cause more harm than good. Complete proper testing so your not giving smoking mirrors and false info to the forums members.

Ding, then you get a "snap vacuum" that collects all the oil in one event and bingo... you have your hydrolock.

I'm getting tired of repeating myself John. I have confirmed that my changes have lowered spikes and prevented the detonation I was seeing. Period.

I did not add any baffles, pills, cow shit, etc. to achieve this. The changes I made were logical John, logical. I lowered the boost ramp-up and decreased dynamic compression ratio. No need to be a mad scientist to figure this one out.

The more torque the stock motor makes (esp at low RPM), the closer it is to the detonation threshold unless you move that threshold up in a number of ways including octane, meth, cooler charge, lower dynamic compression (VVT), etc. Again, logic.

I am sure you can run 110 octane and make the rods bend without detonation with enough torque. This is true for any motor.

The REASON you don't see rods break at WOT is because the forged rods have a tendency to bend before shattering. That's WHY they let go at part throttle. This is why you have people with pulsating clutches and this is why I see motors with more than 1 bent rod in them. I am sure you have seen the same.

By the way "knock" and detonation are synonyms.

AAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHH...! You guys are talking in "absolutes" rather than degrees of effect. :buttkick:

Please come to some compromise and let's make some progress.:nervous:

WTF! Am I playing the voice of sanity here! We are all DOOMED!!!!!:jester:

Have YOU tested the snap vacuum John? Where's the video of that?? Hmm - is that along with the video of the injector seals being tested??

John, where are the blowing CX7s, Foci, Mazda3s .... millions of cars with the same PCV system we have???

Fuck, Ford should be bankrupt. The Duratec they have been selling for a DECADE is doomed - fucking snap vacuum that happens in every car that rolls on the throttle. Someone call headquarters ... oh ... wait ... I don't want to sound like an idiot.

Yes I know this but according to Lex, our motors blow when we get knock. I have seen cars dyno getting 7 counts of knock but there is no visable drop in the TQ curve and when the knock goes away there is no visable increase in the TQ curve. What is significant knock? I know that I can feel the HP fall off in the upper RPM's when knock happens, but in the lower RPM's where its a real problem, I have never seen the dyno chart take a dive that would indicate a real problem.

Maybe Lex or you should get on the dyno and confirm it yourselfs? Maybe this is where proper testing goes into making a correct statement about your efforts vs speculating about what the cyl temps are, how much knock is causing damage, and what the real problem is. I have done my testing, I have my proof, I have torn down multiple motors, I have gotten my hands dirty and have my results. This is why I am in here to keep those that don't do proper testing on their toes!

We tested the nozzle location with air moving through the manifold, it was only 200 CFM but there was air moving through it. I have a new blower here that will move 880 CFM, that we will be doing more testing with. I will hook up a head this time to the manifold and we will open and close the valves (with the stock cam) as needed for this test. This way we will complete "proper testing" of the part. But I really don't know why this was brought up, are we feeling a little butt hurt because someone is asking for "proof"? And this is your way of having a tantrum? We do our testing, now so should you.

Oil pooling in the intake manifold is easy, just pull your t-body off the car and take a look. Ding, oil in the intake.

why dont you two just agree that you both think the other guy is an idiot and get back to the business of making HP. k thanks bye

Stop being a dildo man.


You think i'm adverse to getting factual data? Really? I mean, really? Not only do i go the extra mile to get factual data, i post it up and digest it with the community as a whole. I've been lucky enough to do the legwork on some of the most beneficial factual data this forum has gotten. I say legwork, because it was the community that added the value and understanding to the facts i gathered.

I don't just say i've got gobs of testing, and have seen 50+ blown motors and tuned 1 billion DISIs on the dyno, and claim claim claim and talk talk talk. I post up the facts. All you post up are claims.

I backed up the claim of cruising EGT's with factual data from another platform. I don't have an EGT gauge right now, much less a running car (though its getting very very close ;) ). But when i do you bet your ass i'll post up a shit load of data.

Show us your data mr. call everyone else out. IMO you have the burden of proving your claims, cause your the one selling snake oil unitl proof is shown. Show us the pools of oils, and the pictures, and the videos of all your testing. Then i'll happily stfu and agree with you.

i think you guys should just get together instead of bitching each other out and trying to prove each other wrong -- instead of trying to prove someone wrong, you two are obviously smart as fuck -- smarter than 99.9% of the people in here... put your goddamn brains together and figure this damn thing out -- so all of us can have peace of mind, and we wont have to read thru 38 pages of back and forth bickering

honestly, you guys are smart as fuck -- i love reading what you have to write up

but i think you two could have a huge fucking breakthrough if you just worked together -- put your findings in one spot... and make some damn money off idiots like me who will read thru 7 pages of you guys talking and will buy something that you say will ultimately FIX this problem

Also don't forget to get Ford and Mazda on that conference call. They'd love to see how their motor fails.

During my 4 hour tune session Tim Bailey effectively lowered my boost at the lower RPM's as per our discussions about running safe tunes for the turbo MZR DISI. Less load down low means less chance to go boom. You lose a little bit of torque between 2500-3500 but we can all agree that we shouldn't be going WOT below 3k at a very minimum. AMIRITE?

http://surgeline.cobbtuning.com/dyno...rgb2=204000000
PS: Willy Nelson's one remaining lung has more breath than the K04.

I don't think we will know what exactly is happening in that PCV box unless we can get a clear plastic cover with the same design as the stock cover and a camera/light on it to watch what is happening under different conditions. I don't think it is a matter of a snap vacuum event, but rather an almost perfect storm of conditions occurring.

*yawn*

Funny thing is, it's 99.9% figured out. I think lex hit the nail on the head. Just heed his warnings which are speckled throughout this thread and your motor will live a long and healthy life.

Anything can happen in a "perfect storm" including a tree falling on your car. John is claiming hydrolock on all the part throttle blown speeds which is misleading from MY experience.

But I am just trying to help the community. I had broken engine parts shipped to me at my expense and no gain just to study and understand what is going on. I have had many lengthy discussions with people who have blown.

In the end think about it logically. The stock grocery getter Mazda 3 has the same system and does not blow part throttle. The CX7 doesn't either. It's MS3s and 6s that are modified. However, it happens a lot at "part throttle" which any MS3 or CX7 or Mazda 3 can be at. Yet they are fine. If that is not a compelling argument I don't know what is.

Oh yeah, your boom boom chances are decreased if you don't mod and drive this thing like a 16 year old with a 1992 Civic with automatic transmission.

i've been spiking and kr'ing for 36,000 miles while others have not been spiking or kr'ing in much less mileage yet they go boom and i don't.

theories theories theories.

I doubt all of the part throttle blown motors are due to this. I really haven't followed it enough to know or make guesses on what percentage of them are due to this and if it is significant. I can say looking at what happened to John's engine (which was stock at the time) I am 99.9% sure it was an oil induced hydrolocking incident. I saw the parts, saw the oil and even traced the rout the oil would have taken and it made since with the degree to which each rod was bent.

Though not as sure, I am still fairly certain the Eazy's car experienced the same thing. Beyond those two, I don't really have enough information to be making guesses.

I can also say there was a good amount of oil in the PCV box on my car when I pulled the cover to move the PCV valve to the valve cover. Judging by the oil stains in the box, what was in there wasn't close to the highest the level had been. Like I said, I would be curious to know what goes on with the oil in the box under different conditions. Though I can't think of how, I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possibility that modifying the car has an effect on that.

Who was it that posted up how much oil it would actually take to hydro lock a motor? I forget, but IIRC that amount was sobering. Like it took ALOT of oil.

That's funny, because Eazy tells the story much differently ... involving a boost spike .... hmmmmm .... damn snap vacuum

Yeah, which is why I said less sure. I do know that the cylinder with the bent rod was drenched in oil and the other three were basically dry, but there could be other reasons for that.

Soo... this actually could prove either theory.... Either a long break, building up oil, and leading to oil hydrolock (1 cyl was drenched in oil)... or 25 psi bending a rod.... What you don't know is that I was holding 21-22psi for months before my clutch went out with no problems. So who's to say. My motor should be out on Saturday, so John and I will get a chance to look inside soon. As for oil in the IM, I had to remove ~2-3Tbsp of oil from inside when I did my IM gasket. I've done 2 other cars that had the same pool of oil.


Why do only ONE of you guys have to be right. You both have good points, both are plausible. At this time there is no way to prove anything, so why not (instead of bickering and fighting amongst ourselves) work together.... Neither you or John are claiming your theory is true for all blown motors. Get over your ego, and put your problem solving skills to finding a fix, instead of what childish comeback to post.

My guess? it's a bit of both.

^ A long break build up oil? What is that? Oil does not just build up because the car was on a break.

Anyhow, I'm done here, like I said, I have nothing to gain here, people should make up their own minds, the info is all out there.

Sorry, I guess I missed a comma.... "A long break, building up oil"... you know, like Johns theory.... oil builds up in the PCV. I know you're not that dumb. (I actually think you're pretty smart, just stubborn about contradicting your ideas)

Do you know how the PCV box is designed? It is designed to drain any excess oil. John never mentioned anything about building up oil during day in and day out driving - he just mentioned something about highway driving ... with lots of vacuum ... which is not there when the car is off.

Anyways, I am not going to argue an illogical point anymore. John called me a pussy in the other thread, so I better go take the sand out of my vagina.

I'll tell you this though. If it were me, I would not trust John within 10 feet of my car. Be careful and make your own decisions, it is your money.

His track record of failed product after failed product, and "proven, tested, idea" after idea that failed speak for themselves.

Because we have tested results, we are working on a fix. The other guy, well he has questions and answers with nothing to provide to the community for a fix or solution to the problem. We on the other had are trying for you, the community to find a fix. They know more than me but have yet to confrim how many motors they have torn down or how many motors they have personally blown. They will not commit to any first hand experience, yet they have all the answers. Does that about clear it up?

We have the experience, we have blown motors, we are working on a fix. This means we have more first hand knowledge about the issue at hand. Not only this but as Lex stated, there are no other cars that make the amount of TQ (like the SRT, LOL) at the lower RPM bands like the Mazda, yet Lex clearly stated that the rods were just as strong as the SRT's. I proved that point "WRONG" and they are simply ignoring that I made that obvious to them. They choose to avoid the challenges and cover it up with "I did this and it worked on my car". Well congrats to it working on one fucking car, here is your cookie. Now go out and prove that it works on 100's of these cars and people might believe what you have to say, vs blowing smoke to all the members of this site that are taking what they are saying as truth.

Ha, yea I know how the PCV sytem works, I've been there to help John remove and dissasemble the motor from his MS3 that had 4 bent rods. I've seen the inside of PCV box on the side of the motor, and understand John's theory.
From your comment, you obviously don't understand John's theory, so how the fuck can you argue against it? LOL

Well I'm not you (thank god) and lets see this "failed product after failed product"..... please, show me.

Like John said, you talk and talk and talk.... and change the subject/divert attention/revert to 12 years old whenever someone does what you do and ask for proof.

That may be the design intent, but the design is flawed. Oil can collect and stay in the upper portion of the box (my car had been off for hours by the time I pulled the cover) and I would also be willing to bet it can accumulate quicker then it drains.

The guy i used to work for, well his brother was having sex with his wife (wife on top) and it slipped out and when she came down on it, it broke (fractured). yes You can break your rod (penis) that way

Oh wait here is where we get to the good stuff, we start seeing Lex act like a child and making silly comments and gestures. We have tested the snap vacuum and you can see it on your DH (idiot) and when it happens with the oil chamber full, guess what, you can see it clear a filled oil chamber when it happens. Its has a clear double dip in the vacuum signal when it happens. Now I am sure your going to ask me for datalogs and I will kindly tell you to go figure it out yourself, that should be easy for you to do right?

So we are going to result to attacking my testing, is that because yours is lacking or because you butt hurt now?

So I can take all my dynos from the SRT4 that I have and post those, will that provide the "factual data"? Because it seems OK to post data from other platforms now to verify a point on our cars (LOL< OMFG< LOL).

What am I selling (here is when you get to step on your dick)? I am not selling anything for this fix (yet), we have to prove it to you two idiots first (LOL). Dude, really? GO PULL YOUR INTAKE MANIFOLD OR T-BODY OFF YOUR OWN CAR AFTER A LONG DRIVE, THIS SHOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH VERIFICATION FOR YOU. If I start posting pictures, or hosting vidoe you are just going to say that I poured the oil into the intake. I would rather have those that have posted the pictures here on the site speak the truth for what it is, oil collects in the intake and I think that has been proven by many more then myself.

Last, look at the contempt in your word use, look at how pissed you are that I came in here to challenge your findings and posted solid proof that Lex was wrong and I have yet to hear you or Lex address the rod or TQ down low of the SRT4, HE WAS WRONG YOU TARD, NO MAN THE FUCK UP AND ADMIT IT!

Oh, looky here we have another grown up comment from Lex when he should be addressing the rod and TQ questions from the SRT4, whoops I guess its OK to avoid those questions when your proven WRONG, LOL!

What did he figure out, pull some timing and turn the boost down. This has to be the best joke of all time, LOL. OMG, I think I am going to piss my pants, this is pure Eienstine material here. No shit, you mean that making adjustments to my tune will cure knock, LOL.

Justifications and excusses, you may want to look around there a bit slick there are several Cx7's blowing motors and there have been a very small handful of regular 3's that have blown motors. We just don't see them as often due to them not posting on forums or modding that platform.

Justify your reason however you want, you were wrong in your first post and you have taken your frustrations out on me because of that. You have made childish posts, you have made justifictaions, you have avoided the questions that were posted for you. Paint that picture and you have someone that has all the questions and answers to a therory, but not one solution. What good is that to the members of this forum?

Lol, yes, I am sure you understand it very well along with the multiple bend axis theory. Believe what you want. Go ahead and spike some more to 25+psi on stock rods and see how well it all holds together. The proof is right in front of you yet you ignore it.

Pills that blow dipsticks, injector seals that leak, fuel pumps that seize, meth that sprays in only a couple of cylinders ... should I go on?

I think Lenny was very spot on with the snake oil comment. What can I say, guy calls it like it is.

Oh god, please lets see this list of failed products. I will be waiting for it and this one is simple for you to answer.

Pills that blow dipsticks, we have seen two out of 100's of these sold on the market. Do you have a pill installed on your car and does it blow the dipstick out?

Injectors seals that leak on higher HP cars, well didn't see that coming but we revised that for the higher HP guys, we have a solution tested and should be putting it to the real world here in a few days.

Fuel pumps that seize, well I will give you that one but that was MFG'ing issue that was not anticipated. Who else made a fuel pump for the Mazda market (not some VW drop in part)?

Have you confirmed the WI point problems, we will be testing it here soon and showing the cyl distribution per cyl to "prove" to the members of this site. Have you done anything to back anyone one of these so called "failed" products?

lulz at blowing alot of motors being a sign of skill.



Wow John, just wow. Good luck in life hombre. Thanks for showing us all the light, and how a motor works. I believe anything you say.

Also, john.


If the pooling oil was such a commonality, why the hell did you design a freeze plug water injection?